RAMESH Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant was convicted for the offence under Section 376(1) of IPC and sentenced with seven years' rigorious imprisonment with fine of Rs.2,000/- vide judgment dated 29.11.1996 passed by the learned 10th Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur in ST No.721/1993. Being aggrieved with the conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court, the appellant has preferred the present appeal.

(2.) The prosecution case, in short, is that the prosecutrix (PW-5) was resident of Bilheri (Police Station Cantt., Jabalpur). On 26.6.1993 the prosecutrix went to answer the call of nature and thereafter she was missing. Mohanlal (PW-1), brother of the prosecutrix had lodged a missing report at Police Station Cantt., Jabalpur. After fewdays the prosecutrix (PW-5) went to the Police Station and informed about the incident that the applicant made her unconscious and taken to a house where she was kept in confinement. He committed rape upon her. He took the prosecutrix to a temple and forceful marriage was performed with the prosecutrix. Thereafter the appellant released the prosecutrix with a direction that she would go to her house, and therefore the prosecutrix informed about the incident to her father. After recovery of the prosecutrix she was sent for her medico legal examination. Dr. Sharda Mishra (PW-6) examined the prosecutrix and gave her report Ex.P-11. No external or internal injury was found to the prosecutrix. She had 30 teeth in her mouth. There was no indication about the recent intercourse. Dr. Mishra referred the prosecutrix for the ossification test. After due investigation, a charge sheet was filed before the JMFC, Jabalpur (Shri S.N.Khare), who committed the case to the Sessions Court and ultimately it was transferred to the learned 10th Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur.

(3.) The appellant-accused abjured his guilt. He took a plea that there was a dispute between the father of the appellant with the parents of the prosecutrix. The prosecutrix was interested to marry with the appellant, and therefore when she came herself to the house of the appellant, both of them went to a temple and a marriage was performed and it was decided that the prosecutrix as well as the appellant should appear before the police. In defence Vishram Lal (DW-1) was examined.