RAMESH Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is the appeal of the accused Ramesh aged 19 years who on his conviction under section 376 read with Section 511 of the I.P.C., has been sentenced to three years RI.

(2.) According to the prosecution, the prosecutrix P.W. 1 Mst. Narbadabai, admittedly aged about 10 years or so was all alone in her parental house at about 10 a.m. on 10.6.1985 inasmuch as her mother had gone out to do her labourers job and the father had gone to the hospital to take medicine regarding his own ailment. The appellant-accused was stated to have come to the prosecutrix house and finding that her parents were away, caught hold of her. man-handled her and took her in the back court-yard of the house and after laying her down on the ground, tried to commit sexual intercourse with her but since Rukmanibai (P.W. 3) accidentally arrived at her house and since she saw the appellant accused attempting to commit rape, the appellant-accused fled away. Mst. Rukmanibai and the prosecutrix Narbadabai were stated to have gone to the house of neighbourer P.W. 4 Mst. Dropadibai and she was also apprised of the incident. The prosecutrix father had come back home at about 1 p.m. but he was not apprised of the incident. However, when the mother returned home after the days work at about 4 p.m., the prosecutrix narrated the incident to her and also to her father. Thereafter the report was lodged at the Police Station on the next day morning at 9 a.m. The prosecutrix was medically examined.

(3.) After due investigation, the appellant accused was put up for trial. The appellant accused abjured the guilt and contended that he has been falsely implicated due to ill-will. It is contended that he had purchased mangoes worth Rs. 4/-from Mst. Rukmanibai and had sent a five rupee note through the prosecutrix Narbadabai who did not refund back the balance of Rs. 1/- to him and on this issue Narbadabai abused him and he in turn gave her 2 or 3 slaps and thereafter had also a quarrel with her father Deoram. The trial Court, relying on the prosecution evidence, convicted and sentenced the appellant- accused to the extent as stated at the outset. Hence, the appeal.