GUDDAIYA Vs. STATE OF MP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants have preferred this appeal under section 374 (2) of Cr.P.C. aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 16/5/2006 passed by IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Guna in sessions trial No. 296/05 whereby held both the appellants guilty for the offence punishable under section 376 (2) (g) of IPC and sentenced each of them to ten years R.I. with fine of Rs. 1,000.00, in default further ordered to suffer imprisonment for one year.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 24.8.2005 at about 5.00 p.m. at village Tejakhedi, the complainant-prosecutrix, admittedly a married lady of 37 years was in her field and cutting grass, at that time both the appellant- accused came there, caught hold the complainant-prosecutrix, took her in the field to some distance and thereafter committed rape on her. After the said act both the accused also threatened the complainant-prosecutrix not to disclose the incident to anybody. The complainant-prosecutrix returned to home and narrated the incident to her father-in-law Punilal and husband Man Singh, thereafter on the next day morning FIR had been lodged at police station Jamner, * Decision reproduced in toto. district Guna on which basis the police had registered a case under section 376 IPC, sent the complainant-prosecutrix for medical examination to the hospital where the lady Assistant Surgeon Dr. Shalini Sharma (PW-8) examined the prosecutrix and found no external injuries on the body of the prosecutrix, also prepared two slides of vaginal discharge and after sealing it properly handed over the sealed packet to the concerning constable for its chemical examination and proved the report Ex P-10. After due investigation, charge-sheet has been filed.

(3.) Both the appellants-accused abjured the guilt and their defence is of false implication. It is also further defence that there was some dispute about right of way in between the complainant and the appellants-accused on which basis false report had been lodged against the appellants. The appellants also examined the village Patwari Kishan Singh Pawar (DW-1) as defence witness. The learned trial Court after due appreciation of the entire evidence on record, by impugned judgment held both the appellants guilty for the offence punishable under section 376 (2) (g) of IPC and sentenced each of them as stated here-in-above. Aggrieved by which the appellants have preferred this appeal.