JAIDEO Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this appeal, accused appellant Jaideo has challenged his conviction and sentence under section 376, IPC, passed by Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Betul, on 24.1.1992 in Sessions Trial No. 125/89.

(2.) THE case for the prosecution was that Ramkali Bai (PW 1) was living with Parwati Bai at the time of this incident. On 12th February. 1989. she was returning home around 9.00 p.m. after seeing a movie in the house of Bhoora Kumhar. She was accompanied with Vijay Laxmi (PW 5), daughter of Parwati Bai (PW 6). When she reached near the "Beshram' bushes, accused Jaideo caught hold of her from behind, and covering her mouth with her own shawl, dragged her into the bushes and committed forcible sexual intercourse with her.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the accused challenged his conviction on the ground that Ramkali (PW 1) was an unreliable w itness. Her statement was not corroborated by Vijay Laxmi (PW 5) or Parwati Bai (PW 6). Even if she was sexually molested that night, she could not identify the culprit, and this accused was falsely implicated. Arguments about Ramkali, being a woman of easy virtue, were also advanced.