STATE OF U.P. Vs. ANIL KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal, under Section 378 (3) Cr.P.C. at the behest of the State, has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 13.7.1987, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VIII, Agra, in Session Trial No.193 of 1986 (State vs. Anil Kumar and another) arising out of Case Crime No.96 of 1985 under Sections 366, 376, 376/114 and 201 IPC, Police Station-Jagdishpura, District-Agra, whereby learned trial Judge acquitted both the accused persons of all the charges.

(2.) Brief facts of this case are that a written-report dated 26.5.1985 was submitted by complainant, namely, Raj Narayan Sharma (father of the prosecutrix) stating that on 25.5.1985 at about 6:00-6:30 pm, his daughter, namely, the prosecutrix aged about 14 years, was coming to home after fetching a bucket of water from the well. At that time, Smt.Raj Kumari w/o Om Prakash Sharma was standing on balcony of her house. She called his daughter to her house. His daughter went to the house of Raj Kumari after giving bucket to him. After some time, his daughter came back crying. Her clothes were having blood. On hearing the hue and cry, Munna Lal, Bhagwati Prasad, Deena Nath, etc. gathered there. In front of all, his daughter told the entire story that Anil Kumar was already in the house of Raj Kumari and he forcibly caught her and tried to commit rape. She called Raj Kumari to save her, but Raj Kumari pushed her inside the room. Then Anil Kumar committed rape with her. Subsequently, Anil and Raj Kumari cleaned the blood from the floor of the room and Raj Kumari gave safe escape to Anil Kumar from backdoor of her house.

(3.) On the basis of above written-report, a first information report was lodged as Case Crime No.96 of 1985. Investigation was taken up by SI Bacchu Lal Verma. Investigating Officer visited the spot, prepared site-plan and statements of witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. were also recorded. During the course of investigation, medical examination of the victim was conducted and medical report as well as supplementary report were prepared. After completing the investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the accused persons, namely, Anil Kumar and Raj Kumari. The case being triable exclusively by court of session was committed to the court of session for trial by competent Magistrate. The learned trial court framed charges against accused Anil Kumar under Sections 376 and 201 IPC and against Raj Kumari under Section 376/114 and 201 of IPC. Accused persons denied charges and claimed to be tried.