LAKHAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 28-2-2000 passed by learned Hnd Addl. Sessions Judge, Ashoknagar, Distt. Guna in Sessions Trial No. 348/1998, the appellants have preferred this appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Learned trial Court convicted the appellants and passed the sentences against them as under : <FRM>Name Offence Sentence (i) Shlvraj 363 IPC 5 years RI with fine of Rs. 1000/-in de fault One Year's RI. 366A IPC 7 Years RI with fine of Rs. 1000/- in de fault one year's RI. 376 IPC Seven Year's RI with fine of Rs. 1000/- in default, one year's RI. (ii) Lakhan 363 IPC 5 Years RI with fine of Rs. 1000/- in de fault, One year RI 366A IPC Seven year's RI with fine of Rs. 1000/-in default, one year's RI. 118 IPC Five years RI with fine of Rs. 1000/-in default one year's RI. (iii) Rani Bal 118 IPC Five years RI with Raghuvanshi fine of Rs. 1000/-in default RI for one year; (iv) Pran Singh 118 IPC Five years RI with fine of Rs. 1000/-in default, one year's RI.</FRM> In brief, the case of prosecution is that in the midnight 10-4-1998, accused Rani Bai came inside the house of prosecutrix who was sleeping there and asked to accompany her. Both of them came out from the house and went to the house of Rani Bai where, accused persons namely Shivraj and Lakhan were present. Thereafter, these two accused persons carried the prosecutrix on a Rajdoot Motor Cycle and went to the Bus Stand from where, it is said that Lakhan came back to his house and accused Shivraj carried the prosecutrix to village Maholi in a bus. It is said that in village Maholi, accused Shivraj kept the prosecutrix at the house of his maternal uncle namely Pran Singh who is also an accused in this case. These two persons stayed for 15 days and during this period, it is said that Shivraj committed rape for several times, despite being resisted by the prosecutrix. After 15 days, one day prosecutrix came out from the house and ran away. On the way, she met with her brother Kamal Singh who was searching her. Thereafter, FIR (Ex.P/11) was lodged by prosecutrix on 30-4-1998. Earlier to this report, one Hari Singh who is the brother of the prosecutrix lodged a missing report of on 11-4-1998 in Police Station, Shadhora.

(2.) On the basis of FIR Ex. P/1, lodged by the prosecutrix, a case under Sections 376 and 366A/34 of the IPC was registered against Shivraj and Lakhan and the criminal law was set in motion. The Investigating Officer sent prosecutrix for medical examination, recorded statements of the witnesses and seized the necessary articles. During investigation, Investigating Officer found that accused Rani Bai and Pran Singh also committed offence, as such, they were also arrayed as accused persons. After completion of the investigation, the prosecution filed charge-sheet before 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.

(3.) Learned trial Judge, on perusal of charge-sheet, framed the charges punishable under Sections 363/34, 366A and 376 of IPC against Shivraj, accused Lakhan was charged under Sections 363/34, 366A and 376 of IPC, accused Rani Bai was charged under S. 363/34 and 366A of IPC and similarly, accused Pran Singh was charged under Sections 363/34 and 366A of IPC. Needless to emphasise that all the accused persons abjured their guilt. The defence of the accused persons is that of false implication. In their defence, accused persons examined one Ghanshyam Singh Raghuvanshi who is a teacher of primary school Mathner.