ASHOK KUMAR THAKUR Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 374 of Cr. P. C. being aggrieved by the judgment dated 31-3-1993 passed by the Special Judge, Raisen (established under S. C. & S. T. Prevention of Atrocities Act, in short 'The Act") in the Special Case No. 403/96 convicting and sentencing the appellants under Section 366 and 376 of IPC and Section 3 (1)(xi) of the Act and directed him to undergo for five years R. I. and for seven years R. I. with fine of Rs. 500, in default of it further two months R. I. and six months R. I. respectively under the aforesaid sections.

(2.) The case of the prosecution giving rise to this appeal in short are that the prosecutrix Vishnabai being a woman of "Gond" tribe covered by the Act was residing at Mandideep in the family of her mother and father and she was working as labourer in a stone mine of the appellant. On dated 18-5-1996 when the father and mother of the prosecutrix had gone to Bareli and market respectively on such date at 3 o'clock in the noon the prosecutrix was going to market for bringing vegetable. On the way she was asked by the appellant for going to Bareli saying that her mother is seriously ill. On his request she accompanied him and seated in a mini bus by which the appellant took her to Bhopal where he kept her in the family of his maternal uncle. They also stayed there for such night. On subsequent date the appellant took her to Pipali by bus. She remained there in a vacant house. As alleged the appellant committed rape on her thrice in such house. Even on second day again such act was committed with her by the appellant. Thereafter they came to Bhopal where by leaving her the appellant ran away. On receiving such information by her Bhabhi (sister-in-law), she was sent to Mandideep and mentioned the entire incident to her mother and father. The incident was reported at P. S. Mandideep. After registering the offence the prosecutrix was referred to hospital where on her examination the MLC was prepared. The necessary investigation like x-ray for assessing her age was also carried out. After arresting the appellant and interrogating the witnesses the appellant was charge sheeted under Sections 363, 366, 376 of IPC and also under Section 3(1)(xii) of the Act.

(3.) The Special Court framed the charges against the appellant under Sections 366, 376 of IPC and Section 3(l)(xi) of the Act. On denying the same the appellant was put on trial. The prosecution has examined eight witnesses in order to prove the case but no one has been examined on behalf of the appellant in his defence. At the stage of appreciaton of evidence the Special Judge after holding guilty for the aforesaid all the offences directed the appellant to undergo with fine as mentioned in the earlier part of this judgment. Against the aforesaid conviction and sentence the appellant has preferred his appeal.