NARENDRA KUMAR SAROJ Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) UNDER challenge in the instant criminal appeal is the judgment and order dated 31.01.2012 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge Ex -Cadre, Court No.7, District Pratapgarh, in Sessions Trial No.248 of 2011, relating to Case Crime No.275 of 2010, Police Station Sangipur, District Pratapgarh whereby the appellant - Narendra Kumar Saroj was convicted and following sentences were imposed on him:

(2.) BRIEF facts necessary for the disposal of instant appeal are that the occurrence of this case is alleged to have taken place on 08.12.2010 while the FIR of this case was lodged by the mother of the victim on 24.12.2010 at 7.35 a.m. According to the narration of the FIR, the victim had gone to field by the side of the river to rope her goat for grazing and the appellant reached there and forcibly caught hold of the victim and took her inside the Sarpat and committed rape with her. When the victim raised alarm and told him that he will disclose this incident to her parents then she was threatened with dire consequences. After this incident the victim became very scared. On 19.12.2010, in a very depressed condition, she disclosed this incident to her mother. When her mother asked the victim as to why she had not disclosed this incident to her then she told her that she was threatened with dire consequences, therefore she could not dare to disclose this incident. The victim further told her mother that in a hurry, the appellant left his pant and towel on the spot which she brought and has kept safely in the house. On the basis of this FIR, the case was registered and the victim was referred for her medical examination which took place on the same day at 5.00 p.m. in District Women Hospital, Pratapgarh. According to the medical examination report no injury on her body or on her private part was found and there was no bleeding or redness or tenderness and no discharge was present. Hymen was old torn and no bleeding was present and no redness or congestion, no tenderness was found and vagina admitted two fingers easily. Uterus was of normal size. Vaginal smear was taken and two slides were prepared for pathological test. The victim was referred for X -ray for determination of her age. On the basis of the aforesaid tests no definite opinion could be given by the doctor and her radiological age was reported to be about 17 years. The Investigating Officer investigated the place of occurrence on the same day. During the course of investigation on 07.01.2011 the pant and towel of the appellant was taken into custody by the police and was sent for Forensic Science Lab for examination. As per the Forensic Science Lab report no spermatozoa or any other abnormal thing was reported. The statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded on 04.01.2011 and thereafter the victim was given in the custody of her mother on 05.01.2011. After completing the investigation the charge -sheet was filed.

(3.) THE case of the defence was that the victim and the appellant belong to the same family and they are pattidars with each other and there was enmity of litigation in the two families because there was dispute of "Nabdaan" regarding which a civil suit was pending. In order to pressurize the appellant's family not to pursue the civil suit, this false case has been concocted. It was also pleaded that in the month of May, 2006 an incident of Marpeet had taken place for which a NCR was lodged on behalf of Ram Pher who is family member of the appellant and lastly it was also pleaded that the appellant was selected in Army on the post of Store Keeper for which he had received the call letter and simply because of the enmity, with an intention to make the appellant disentitled for the said appointment of Government Job, this false case was concocted against him.