HUKUM SINGH Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the appellants is against the judgment dated 14.7.1992 passed by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Shajapur (Camp Shujalpur) in S.T. 131 of 1991. By the impugned judgment the appellant No. 1 Hukum Singh has been convicted for having committed offences punishable under Ss. 458, 354, 323 IPC read with Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short the Act of 1989) though no sentence was handed down to the appellant No. 1 and Aziz appellant No. 2 having committed offences punishable under Ss. 456, 323 IPC. Details of their offences and sentence in respect of each count passed by the learned trial Court are as under - Offence Sentence Hukum Singh 458 IPC 4 years RI + Fine of Rs. 500/ - in default 3 months RI. 354 IPC 2 years RI + Fine of Rs. 250/ - in default 1 & 1/2 months RI 323 IPC 6 months RI + Fine of Rs. 250/ - in default 1 & 1/2 months RI Aziz 456 IPC 1 years RI + Fine of Rs. 250/ - in default 1 & 1/2 months RI. 323 IPC 6 months RI + Fine of Rs. 250/ - in default 1 & 1/2 months RI. Out of the fine amount of Rs. 1,000/ - payable by appellant No. 1, trial Court ordered payment of Rs. 500/ - and Rs. 250/ - to Krishnabai and Hariprasad respectively as compensation under section 357 CrPC.

(2.) THE relevant facts that are material for the disposal of the present appeal are as under. That about 1 a.m. in the night of 13.2.1991, appellant No. 1 and 2 entered the hut where Krishnabai (PW 4) was sleeping with the intention to outrage her modesty and commit rape. Hearing the noise she woke up and noticed the presence of appellant No. 1 and 2 in the hut. No sooner she woke up, appellant No. 1 smashed electric bulb which was burning inside the hut and then forcibly committed rape causing her other personal injuries. Alerted by the hue and cry raised by her, Hariprasad (PW 5) her husband who was guarding the crop in the adjoining field rushed to her rescue. As soon as reached the hut, appellant No. 1 and 2 along with two others assailants who were hiding outside the hut gave beating to Hariprasad and then ran away from the scene. As a result of beating, PW 5 remained unconscious throughout the night and upon regaining consciousness in next morning i.e. on 14.2.1991, Krishnabai and her husband Hariprasad narrated the incident to village Kotwar Prabhulal (PW 1) and Ramswarup (PW 2), the younger brother of Hariprasad. Thereafter they went to police Choky Kalapipal and Krishnabai lodged the FIR (Ex. P. 3) on 14.2.1991 that set in motion the investigation.

(3.) LEARNED trial Court after appreciating material evidence, as has been brought on record by the prosecution during trial, found that no offence has been proved against the accused No. 3 Shivprasad on any count therefore, he was acquitted of all the charges framed against him. State has not preferred any appeal against his acquittal so it has become final. So far as charges under section 450 and 376 against appellant No. 1 are concerned, on the basis of the evidence on record, learned Sessions Judge found that the prosecution has failed to prove the either of the offences punishable under section 450 or 376 against appellant No. 1, and therefore, he was acquitted of those two charges. However, learned trial Judge on the basis of evidence found that the both the appellants are guilty of having committed the offences hence convicted and passed sentences against them as mentioned above.