SADHU ALIAS SADHURAM Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant Sadhoo alias Sadhuram having been convicted by 1st Additional Session Judge, Damoh in Sessions Trial No. 80/91 deciding the charges against him on 27/6/1992 and convicted for committing offence under section 376 (2) (f), 366 -Aand 363. Indian Penal Code where under sentenced for 10 years 5 years and 3 years rigorous imprisonment respectively, has approached this Court by means of the present appeal which is being decided on merit after hearing learned counsel for the State and the accused who is present in person before this Court.

(2.) THOUGH the accused was represented through a lawyer but was not granted bail. The Court on 1.11.1996 when the case was posted for hearing passed an order to the effect that none present for the appellant when the case was called for in the second round and directed for issuance of production warrant of the appellant of a date for hearing of this case in the presence of the appellant. The appellant is brought in person before this Court. It needs to be mentioned here that the learned State counsel Shri S.K. Gangrade, Panel Lawyer, was very fair in properly assisting the Court specially in the circumstances of the present case where the accused in the person neither conversant with the legal position nor record of his case. The sentences awarded to the accused/appellant under sections 363,366 -A and 376 (2) (f) of the Indian Penal Code, were made to run concurrently.

(3.) PROSECUTION examined as many as 10 witnesses. Ku. Anita was examined as P.W. 1 Ram Prasad father of the prosecutrix, was examined as P.W. 2 Narayan Singh, Naib Tehsildar, who conducted the identification parade relating to the identification of the accused/appellant on 20th March 1991, was examined as P.W. 3, Jasni Bhatt the lady constable, who was witness relating to the seizure memo, was examined as P.W. 4, Bhaiyyan who saw taking the prosecutrix on Riksha by the accused and was witness of seizure, was examined as P.W. 5, Fagulal who was examined as witness of arrest of the accused as P.W. 6. B.D. Tripathi Assistant Sub Inspector of Police Kotwali Damon who conducted investigation and took written statement of the prosecutrix Ex. P -14, dated 10.2.91 was examined as P.W. 7 Dr. R.K. Sachdeo, who conducted medical examination of the accused/appellant on 19.2.91, was examined as P.W. 3 and Dr. Chanda Jain, who examined the prosecutrix, was examined as P.W. 9 and Karamat Khan a constable, who proved Rajnamcha Sanha (Ex. P. 14), was examined as P.W. 10. The prosecutrix was examined by the Doctor Chanda Jain (PW. 9) and the medical report is Ex. P. 5 -A. The accused/appellant was examined by Dr. R.K. Sachdeo (PW 8) and the medical report is Ex. P. 13. The defence was that of denial and false implication in the crime. The defence did not examine any witness.