RAMGOPAL GANGARAM Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal from the judgment of Shri Raina, Sessions Judge, Jabalpur, whereby the appellant has been convicted of the offence under Section 376, Penal code, and sentenced to two years rigorous imprisonment. The learned Sessions judge has directed that instead of undergoing his sentence he would be sent to a reformatory School under the Reformatory Schools Act, 1897, and shall be detained there for a period of two years.

(2.) THE accused is about 15 years of age. His mother died some years ago. He lives with his father. In the neighbourhood resides Kumari Budhia, a girl of about 8 or 9 years, with her parents. She often used to go to his house for playing. On 13th january 1965, at about 5 p. m. , she went to his house to play with him (vide her cross-examination ). At that, time there was no one in his house. He took her in a room, lay her down and committed sexual intercourse. On medical examination, the following injuries were found on her person: " (1) A superficial abrasion on the inner side of both the labia minora, size 1/10" x 1/10". It was red, tender and painful. There was no bleeding or discharge. Both the labia minora were swollen. (2) A small superficial laceration was present on the hymen at 6o'clock position. There was no bleeding from the laceration. It was painful to touch and swollen" Dr. (Kumari) Urmila Gour, P. W. 8) says that both the labia minora were normal. There was no redness, tenderness or swelling. There were no marks of seminal stains over pubes or thighs. There was no injury on any other part of her body. These facts are not in dispute. He made a clean breast of his guilt at all stages of the trial, although the learned Sessions Judge did not deem it fit to convict him on his plea of guilty. However slight was the penetration, the accused is guilty of rape, in the eye of law.

(3.) ALL that is urged by Shri Harshey, learned Counsel for the appellant, is that the accused should be dealt with under Section 31 (1) of the Reformatory Schools Act rather than under Section 8 (1 ). They read thus: