NARENDRASINGH Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present is a case of classic features wherein appellant Narendra Singh on having been convicted under Section 376, I.P.C. for committing rape on a minor girl, namely, Kuleshari in S.T. No. 80/85 vide judgement and order dated 31-3-1986 passed by the Sessions Judge, Rajnandgaon, wherefor he was sentenced to 3 years R.I. has approached to this Court in appellate forum prayer for setting aside of the conviction as well as sentence.

(2.) The appellant and the prosecutrix Kuleshari both are residents of the same village Amgaon, P. S. Dongargaon and there is no ascertained place of occurrence as the incident is not a solitary one and as such the time of incident also cannot be described as the alleged offence was of recurring nature. According to the version of the prosecution, it appears that the prosecutrix was employed by the accused or the family of the accused for the house-hold work as well as for agriculture work in the agriculture fields for about a year before the alleged occurrence. The process of enticement of the prosecutrix started by the appellant by giving gifts and other articles to her, which ultimately resulted in intimacy so much so that the accused got an opportunity for satisfying his last will and he one day in his own field, which was near to the village tank, caught hold of the prosecutrix and she was fell down on the ground for committing sexual intercourse and the same was committed sometime in July, 84. This was only the starting, but the process of sexual intercourse became a recurring feature with the prosecutrix and it was committed even in his own house by the appellant. The criminal machinery was set in motion when the prosecutrix entered in to the advanced stage of pregnancy, which medically could not be aborted. This situation led to the lodging of a report with the Police on 17-6-1986. Nakal Rojnancha Sanha was recorded and was marked as Ex.P. 1A-C. On the basis thereof Crime No. 97/85 under Section 376, I.P.C. was registered at Police Station Dongargaon, on 29-7-1985 at 11.00 P.M. wherein place and time of occurrence was not mentioned.

(3.) The prosecution examined as many as 12 witnesses. Prosecutrix was examined as P.W. 1. Dr. Sushma Gupta was examined as P.W. 2 as she found the prosecutrix in full pregnancy. Dr. Arvind Kumar Gupta was examined as P.W. 3 as he examined the accused regarding his capability for committing the offence in question, Rudramani Tiwari was examined as P.W. 4, who is witness to the seizure of the School Admission Certificate. Dr. A. K. Gupta, Radiologist, was examined as P.W. 5 as he conducted the X-ray of the prosecutrix for giving opinion about her age. Mehtarram Thakur was examined as P.W. 6 as he was the person who brought the Admission Certificate (Ex. P/10) to the Court, Ganesh Ram Sahu was examined as P.W. 7 as he prepared the site map. Smt. S. V. Peter, a Nurse, was examined as P.W. 8 Sewant Ram, the father of the prosecutrix, was examined as P.W. 9. Inderbati who accompanied the prosecutrix to hospital was examined as P.W. 10. Budduram was, examined as P.W. 11, N. R. Yadav, Sub-Inspector, was examined as P.W. 12 being an Investigating Officer.