PUTTA YELLAIAH Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was convicted under Section 376 IPC in Sessions Case No. 4 of 89 on the file of the Asst. Sessions Judge, Siddipet and sentenced to suffer R. 1. for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default to suffer R 1. for four months. On appeal the learned Sessions Judge confirmed the conviction and also the sentence of R.I. for seven years but deleted the sentence of fine.

(2.) IN this revision the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the medical evidence does not support the evidence of P. W. 1 that she was forcibly subjected to sexual intercourse or that rape was committed on her. The victim P.W. 1 deposed that the accused took her into the bushes and put a piece of cloth in her mouth and forcibly committed sexual intercourse on her. The doctor who examined the victim on the next day has stated that she did not find any blood strains either on her clothes or on her private parts and also did not find any injuries such as laceration and bruise and found the condition of hymen normal. The learned Sessions Judge considered these aspects and pointed out that P.W. 1 is a married woman and is, habituated to sexual inter-course and in fact she was pregnant by three weeks by then. He has also pointed out that in the case of a rape on a woman habituated to sexual intercourse, physical injuries on private parts cannot be expected. He has also considered the other aspect whether she would be a consenting party. But in view of her evidence as P.W. 1 that she was not a consenting party and the accused committed the offence of rape forcibly, the learned Sessions Judge relied as the presumption U/Sec. 114-A of the INdian Evidence Act which says that where sexual inter-course by the accused is proved and the question is whether it was without the consent of the woman alleged to have been raped and she stated in her evidence before the court that she did not consent the court shall presume that she did not consent. Both the courts below accepted the evidence of P.W. 1 who stated that the accused had forcibly committed sexual intercourse on her and convicted the accused u/s. 376 IPC. I do not find any illegallity or irregularity either in the conviction or in the sentence passed against the apcused because the minimum sentence under Section 376 IPC is 7 years. The revision is therefore dismissed.