SWAMI DAYAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the Appellant and learned State counsel on the prayer for bail and perused the record.

(2.) The Appellant has been convicted in Session Trial No. 545/2006 under Sections 376, 504, 506(2) I.P.C. and sentenced ten years Imprisonment with fine and default stipulation.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the trial court has erred in appreciating the evidence on record and has wrongly convicted the Appellant. It is submitted that according to P.W.-5 Dr. Sailat, the prosecutrix was a married woman aged about 18 years. Learned Counsel submits that false, fabricated and concocted case has been setup against the Appellant due to enmity. The husband of the prosecutrix was contesting for the post of Pradhan and the Appellant was supporting one Shiv Balak. It is further submitted that the prosecutrix was pregnant and carrying a child of 22 weeks. Learned Counsel also submits that it is highly improbable that while committing rape upon a pregnant lady, there would be no resistance on her part, since injury report does not reveal any injury on the body of prosecutrix.