TARELAL Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner Tarelal was arrested by Police Tarniya, Distt. Chhindwara, on 15.6.95, for his alleged involvement in the above crime registered u/Section 376 read with Section 34 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(xii) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

(2.) According to the prosecution case, as contained in the police case diary, prosecutrix Kisaniya Bai lodged a report at Police Station Tamiya, on 14.6.95, alleging that she was working at the house of co-accused Mahesh on a salary of Rs. 1200/- for one year. Kisaniya Bai further alleged in her report that accused Mahesh, during this period, committed rape on oral occasions. Petitioner Tarelal is also alleged to have committed rape on the prosecutrix. On account of the above acts of the accused persons, prosecutrix Kisaniya Bai became pregnant. Both the accused persons disowned their liability about the pregnancy and, therefore, the matter was reported to the Police.

(3.) Mr. Kochar, the learned Counsel for the petitioner, contended that the FIR was lodged by the prosecutrix with inordinate delay and only after her becoming pregnant. It was further contended that the prosecutrix is a grown-up woman and was a consenting party to the alleged sexual acts. It was further pointed out that the petitioner is in custody for the last about 8 months and there is no likelihood of his trial coming to an end in the near future.