RAJESH Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THEY are heard on I.A. No. 5129/2012, which is an application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail filed on behalf of appellant -Rajesh. The appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under section 376 of IPC and section 3 (2) (v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and sentenced to suffer imprisonment as mentioned in the impugned judgment. The contention of Learned Counsel for appellant is that even if the statement of prosecutrix is relied upon, she appears to be a consenting party. By inviting our attention to the findings as well as evidence placed on record, it is contended by the Learned Counsel that on record it is proved that the age of the prosecutrix on the date of incident was above 16 years. On these premised submissions, it has been contended by Learned Counsel that learned Trial Court erred in convicting the appellant.

(2.) SHRI J.M. Sahani, learned Public Prosecutor has argued in support of the impugned judgment.