SHRIPAL YADAV Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against judgment and order of conviction and sentence dtd. 14/12/2017, passed by the Special Judge (POCSO)/Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.6, Shahjahanpur in Special Case No.60 of 2014 (State Vs. Shripal Yadav), arising out of Case Crime No.264 of 2014, Police Station Garhiya Rangeen, District Shahjahanpur, whereby the accused appellant Shripal Yadav has been convicted and sentenced to 7 years rigorous imprisonment alongwith fine of Rs.10,000.00 under Sec. 452 IPC and on failure to deposit fine to undergo additional simple imprisonment for a month; and life imprisonment alongwith fine of Rs.50,000.00 under Sec. 376-D IPC and on failure to deposit the fine to undergo additional simple imprisonment for two months. Sentences are to run concurrently.

(2.) As per the prosecution case, informant (PW-1) was sleeping alongwith her daughter, aged 12-13 years, in the intervening night of 17/18/4/2014 at about 1.00 in the night, when the accused Rahul Yadav and Shripal Yadav came armed with countrymade pistol and forcibly abducted her minor daughter, who was later subjected to sexual assault by them. The victim was left in the village with threats that mother would not be allowed to live in the village. The informant tried to lodge a report but the villagers surrounded her and did not allow her to go to police station. No medical examination was held either. Repeated attempts to reach out to police personnel also failed. Ultimately the FIR was registered at 9.30 am on 19/6/2014. Written report on the basis of which FIR got registered is Ex.Ka-1 and has been proved by PW-1. The victim has been medically examined on 20/6/2014, in which no external or internal injuries have been found. Age of the victim has been determined medically as 18 years. Her hymen was found old torn and healed. The statement of victim was also got recorded on 25/6/2014, as per which the incident occurred on the date of elections. The accused came, gagged her mouth and forcibly abducted her on gun point. Thereafter, victim was allegedly subjected to sexual assault in the Verandah of accused Rahul and the victim was later left at her house at about 4.00 in the morning. Threats were extended to the victim. Though the victim claims to have informed of the incident to her mother but they were not allowed to go to police station. It is alleged that only when a complaint was made to higher authorities that the FIR was registered. Statement of victim was also recorded under Sec. 161 Cr.P.C. On the basis of evidence collected during investigation the chargesheet was submitted against the accused appellant on 11/7/2014.

(3.) The Magistrate took cognizance of the aforesaid chargesheet and committed the case to the court of sessions, where charges were framed on 13/5/2015 against the accused appellant under Ss. 452, 376-D IPC and 5-G/6 of POCSO Act. The accused denied the charges and demanded trial.