GANDHARV SINGH Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal under Section 374 of Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the judgment dated 12.08.2004 passed by Special Sessions Judge, Shivpuri in Special Sessions Trial No.112/04 by which appellant Gandharv Singh has been convicted with R.I. for seven years and fine of Rs.500/ -under Section 376 of IPC and one month simple imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 323 of IPC.

(2.) IN brief, the prosecution case is that prosecutrix (PW -1) wife of Aparival Bangar lodged a report at Police Station Sihore, district Shivpuri that at about 10 P.M. on 03.04.2004 when she was sleeping alone in her house, accused Gandharv Singh entered her house and caught her and asked about her husband and shut her mouth, threatened her and committed rape with her. When she started shouting, her mother -in -law Kausabai and uncle -in -law Jagdish came there, appellant ran away. She narrated the story to them. She was a member of Scheduled Castes and accused Gandharv Singh was a member of upper Castes. The report has been lodged by the prosecutrix at Police Station Sihore, District Shivpuri. A case has been registered under Sections 376 and 323 of IPC and under Section 3(i)(xii) of The Scheduled Castes and The Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities ) Act against the appellant. Prosecutrix and accused were sent for medical examination and after usual investigation, the charge -sheet has been filed and accused was charged and legally was tried after charge.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant has submitted that prosecutrix (PW -1) though narrated the story of rape but she did not recognize the person who committed rape with her and it was complete darkness and she did not name the accused in her F.I.R. vide Exhibit P -1. Jagdish (PW -2), maternal uncle of prosecutrix has also not supported the story saying that some unknown person has committed rape. Dr. Vinod Chaurasiya (PW -3) is a formal witness, who stated that no sexual intercourse has been committed by him and Dr. Smt. Anjana Jain (PW -4), who examined the prosecutrix has not given any opinion about sexual intercourse. Mahinder Kunwar, I.O. has given his statement, which is of formal nature.