ARMAN ALI Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal is preferred by the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment dated 7/10/2009 passed by the 9 th Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal in ST No.236/2009, whereby the appellant was convicted and sentenced as under:- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_1085_TLMPH0_2012_1.html</FRM>

(2.) The prosecution's case, in short, is that the prosecutrix (PW-3) was a 14 years old girl, who was resident of Tilajamalpura, Bhopal. On 25.1.2009 when her father's birthday party was going on at about 10:30 PM in the night the prosecutrix went out to bring some edible goods. On the way back the appellant met him and asked her to go with him. Thereafter he held the hand of the prosecutrix and snatched her. The prosecutrix was taken on a motorcycle, which was driven by one Sahab. The prosecutrix shouted, but since a full volume music was going on in her house, nobody could hear her shouting. The prosecutrix was taken to a house where the appellant committed rape upon the prosecutrix. At about 5:00 AM in the morning, the co-accused Sahab came back and left the prosecutrix nearby her house. In the meantime, the parents of the prosecutrix had lodged a missing report at the Police Station Tilajamalpura (Bhopal). After the recovery of the prosecutrix, she was sent to the hospital for her medico legal examination. Dr. Kiran Badia (PW-8) examined the prosecutrix at Sultaniya Janana Hospital, Bhopal and gave her report Ex.P-10. No external or internal injury was found on the person of the prosecutrix, and therefore two slides of her vaginal swab were prepared and her clothings were also taken by Dr. Badia. Such material was handed over for their forensic examination to the concerned Constable after sealing them,. She was also referred for the Radiological examination. Dr. Neelam Shrivastava (PW-5) on the requisition of Radiological examination gave her opinion that age may be assessed by the educational record and no Radiological examination was required. After due investigation, a charge sheet was filed before the JMFC, Bhopal, who committed the case to the Sessions Judge, Bhopal and ultimately it was transferred to the 9 th Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal.

(3.) The appellant-accused abjured his guilt. He did not take any specific plea, but he has stated that he was falsely implicated in the matter. He has challenged that the date of birth recorded in the school was not correct. The prosecutrix was above 18 years of age. She was a consenting party. In support of his defence, one Kavita (DW-1) was examined.