BHAGELU HARIJAN Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this appeal to the judgment and order dated 01.04.2002 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 4, in Sessions Trial No. 349 of 2001 (State v/s. Bhagelu Harijan), arising out of Case Crime No. 27 of 2001, under Ss. 363, 366 and 376 I.P.C., P.S. Mirzamurad, District Varanasi, whereby the appellant had been convicted for the offence punishable under Sec. 376 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life coupled with fine of Rs. 5000/ -, under Sec. 366 I.P.C. for ten years R.I. coupled with fine of Rs. 5000/ - and under Sec. 363 I.P.C. for seven years R.I. coupled with fine of Rs. 5000/ - with default stipulation. All the sentences were to run concurrently out of the amount of fine which was Rs. 15,000/ -, Rs. 10,000/ - was directed to be paid to the father of the victim namely Ravi Shankar Maurya.

(2.) Shorn of details of prosecution story was that the informant was residing as tenant in the house of Kishore Yadav and was doing the work of labourer. The accused Bhagelu Harijan was also doing the job of labourer with him. Bhagelu Harijan used to come to the house of informant. On 22.02.2001, the informant and his wife Parwati had gone to do labour. His daughter namely Suman aged about 10 years was present in the house. His two other children were also present in the house. At 05:45 P.M., when the informant came back to his house along with his wife, his daughter Suman was not present there. Mohan Yadav told the informant that the accused Bhagelu Harijan had taken Suman on his cycle towards his house. When the informant along with his wife and Mohan Yadav were going towards the house of Bhagelu Harijan, he heard the shrieks of his daughter near the garden of Ram Lakhan at 06:30 P.M. He went in the garden and saw that the accused Bhagelu Harijan was committing rape on his daughter. He tried to apprehend him but the accused fled away, hence the report was lodged.

(3.) On the basis of this written report, a case at Case Crime No. 27 of 2001, under Ss. 363, 366 and 376 I.P.C. was registered against the accused appellant. The investigation was taken up by S.I. Anil Chandra Tiwari PW -7. Dr. Mridula Malik, PW -2 had conducted the medical examination of the victim Suman on 23.03.2001 at 12:05 in the afternoon and did not find any external injury. On internal examination the hymen was found partially torn. No bleeding was present. The vagina did not admit tip of the little finger. Dr. Mridula Malik has proved the medical report as Exhibit Ka -1. Dr. D.D. Mishra, PW -3 has medically examined the accused. He proved the medical report as Exhibit Ka -2. He also stated that the accused has confessed before him that he had penetrated his penis into the vagina of the girl due to which the accused sustained the following injuries on his person: - -