JEEV RAKHAN Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by 1st. Additional Sessions Judge, Ashok Nagar, Distt. Guna, in Sessions Trial No. 338/2000, by which appellant has been convicted u/S. 376 of IPC and has been sentenced to suffer Seven Years' RI and fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default to undergo Six months' further RI, the appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 374 of Code of Criminal Procedure 1973.

(2.) In brief, the case of prosecution is that appellant was residing in the house of father of the prosecutrix in the capacity of a tenant. In the month of Chaitra (April), 2000, the parents of the prosecutrix went to cut the crop and her brothesr were not at home, in the noon at 12, the prosecutrix aged 14 years was alone in the house and was going to take her bath on a handpump which is outside but nearby to her house, at that juncture, the appellant came and winked her as a result of which, she returned back to the house and went inside. Thereafter, it is said that appellant closed the door and by showing fear, she was forced to be undressed and later on, intercoursed with her. After completing the intercourse, it is said that appellant warned her not to narrate the incident to anybody including the parents otherwise, she may face the dire consequences. Later on, after some days, appellant again intercoursed with her for six or seven times as a result of which the prosecutrix became pregnant. It is said that appellant took the prosecutrix in a Clinic for her examination, where she was examined by acquitted co- accused Ram Bharosa and he injected some Injections to her but the abortion did not take place. One day, when the prosecutrix was taking her bath, her mother Susheela Bai (PW-3) saw the posture of her abdomen which was grown, as a result of which, she inquired about it but the prosecutrix did not say anything. Thereafter, Susheela Bai narrated this fact to her husband Bal Mukund (PW-4) who under some false pretext, carried the prosecutrix to Dr. Paras Kumar Jain (PW-10) who after examination, confirmed the pregnancy of the prosecutrix. On being inquired by Doctor, the prosecutrix stated that appellant committed intercourse with her for 6-7 times. Thereafter, this fact was narrated by the prosecutrix to her mother and thereafter the FIR was lodged on 22-8- 2000 at Police Station, Shadhora.

(3.) On lodging of the FIR, criminal law was set in motion. Investigating Officer sent the prosecutrix for medical examination, collected the evidence from the school in respect to her age, recorded the statement of the witnesses and after completing investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted in the competent Court who on its turn, committed the case to the Court of Session and from where, it was received by the trial Court for trial.