HARIKRISHNA Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 11.12.1996 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Khurai in Sessions Trial No.101/1996 whereby the appellant was convicted for offences punishable under Sections 376(1) and 457 of I.P.C and sentenced for seven years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1000/- and two years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine he was to undergo for two months rigorous imprisonment and one months imprisonment respectively in addition.

(2.) PROSECUTION's case, in short, is that the prosecutrix (PW4) was sleeping in her house in the night of 18th and 19th January 1996 at Village Jharvas, Police Station Khurai. about 12.00 in the night the appellant Harikrishna @ Krishna entered in her room by opening the door and by showing a knife and putting some clothes in her mouth, he committed rape upon the prosecutrix. Thereafter, he ran away from the spot. When the prosecutrix went behind him, she saw the co- accused Gangaram was standing in the courtyard. She started shouting then Harikrishna and Gangaram climbed the wall and went in the house of Gangaram. The prosecutrix immediately rushed to the house of her mother-in-law Jhunari (PW3) and informed her about the incident. Jhunari kept her daughter-in-law in her room till morning. Nanhu (PW2), husband of the prosecutrix, went to do some labour work and therefore, he went back on the next day at about 3.00 p.m. Thereafter, prosecutrix informed him about the incident and he took the prosecutrix to the Police Station, Khurai where she lodged FIR Ex.P/2 at 5.30 p.m. She was directed for her medico legal examination. Dr. Usha Saina (PW5) examined the prosecutrix and submitted a report Ex.P/3. No external or internal injury was found on her person. The petticoat was taken from the prosecutrix and a slide of vaginal swab was prepared by Dr. Saina and she handed over such things to the concerned Policeman after sealing. Such articles were seized by SHO Rajbir Singh Yadav (PW7) and prepared a memo Ex.P/1. The appellant was arrested and he was also directed for his medico legal examination. His semen slide was also prepared by Dr. D.B.S. Chouhan (P.W.6) and handed over to the concerned Policeman after sealing it. That slide was also seized by SHO Rajbir Singh Yadav and a memo Ex.P/8 was prepared. All the seized articles were sent for Forensic Science Analysis and Forensic Science Laboratory had submitted a report Ex.P/9, by which it was mentioned that there was no any stain of blood or semen was found on the petticoat but, semen was found on the slides of the appellant as well as the prosecutrix. After due investigation a charge sheet was filed before JMFC Khurai who committed the case to the Sessions Judge, Sagar and ultimately it was transferred to the Additional Sessions Judge, Khurai for trial.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties.