SAWANT Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sessions Judge, Sehore in Sessions Trial No. 142/90 vide impugned judgment dated 1-9-1992 recording conviction of appellant under S. 376 of I.P.C. sentenced him to undergo R.I. for a period of 7 years. Being aggrieved. appellant has preferred this appeal under S. 374(2) of Cr.P.C.

(2.) On 19-12-1989 prosecutrix (P.W. 8) lodged a report (Exhibit P-7) to the effect that about a month back while her mother- in-law was hospitalised at Icchawar hospital and her husband had gone to the school, in the afternoon when she was alone in the house, her father-in-law/appellant having entered into the house locked the back door and thrown her on the ground committed rape with her and threatened that if she will cry he will kill her. After satisfying his lust, he left the house. Proseeutrix narrated above incident to Rajkunwar Bai (P.W. 6), Harnath Chamar as well as to her husband in the evening. After 15 days, complainants-husband left proseeutrix to her paternal house. Proseeutrix intimated whole incident to her parents. Next day, they went to Police Station Icchawar to lodge the complaint against appellant. Meanwhile, appellant, maternal father-in-law, brother-in-law and some community members persuaded proseeutrix and her father to settle the matter in the caste panchayat. On their persuasion, they did not lodge the report. The community panchayat was held on 10-12-1989 in the village of appellant but no settlement could have been taken place in that panchayat, therefore, on 19-12-1989 F.I.R. (Exhibit P-7) was lodged. On the basis of this report Crime No. 215/ 89 under Ss. 376 and 506-B of I.P.C. was registered. Proseeutrix (P.W. 8) was sent for medical examination. As per medical examination report (Exhibit P-9) given by Dr. T. Khanna (P.W. 9), no marks of injury was seen on any part of her body. The alleged accident took place a month back, proseeutrix being married lady and consequently habitual to sexual intercourse, no opinion about rape was given by lady doctor. Completing the investigation, appellant was charge-sheeted.

(3.) Appellant abjured the guilt and contended that he is being falsely implicated in this case because prosecutrix wants to live with her lover Ravishankar and she has lodged the F.I.R. after many days of the incident. The Court below in S.T. No. 142/90 vide impugned judgment relying upon the testimony of prosecutrix (P.W. 8) held that appellant committed rape with the prosecutrix. As such, recording conviction under S. 376 of I.P.C. he has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of 7 years.