RAMCHARAN Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is the appeal of the accused Ramcharan, who on his conviction under Section 376 of the I.P.C. has been sentenced to four years rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) In the morning hours on 13.11.1980, P.W. 1 Mst. Phullibai, wife of P.W. 3 Devi, aged, about 25 years had gone to her Jawar field and from there she had gone with her bullocks to Kalught for quenching the thrust of her bullocks. When she was returning with the bullocks, the appellant-accused was stated to have caught her and to have felled her on the ground to have committed rape with her. On her cries of alarm P.W. 10 Ramswaroop Madotiya was stated to have arrived at the scene and on his chastisement the appellant accused was stated to have fled away. The prosecutrix Mst. Phullibai, on returning home at noon time, had reported at first to her father in law P.W. 7 Chetan alias Gajju and to have reported the incident to her husband P.W. 3 Devi when he returned from Railway duty in the evening. P.W. 2 Dhyam Singh of the village was stated to have been apprised of the incident promptly by the prosecutrixs husband. Report was lodged at the Police Station at the same night. After due investigation the appellant-accused was put up for trial. He claimed to be falsely implicated. The trial Court relying on the prosecution evidence, convicted and sentenced the appellant-accused to the extent as stated at the outset. Hence, now the present appeal.

(3.) Shri A.K. Pandey, the learned counsel for the appellant-accused has urged that the whole prosecution evidence is highly discrepant and full of mutual contradictions and therefore, the prosecution evidence was of no probative value.