(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence, dated 2.3.2000 passed by Sessions Judge, Shivpuri (M.P.) in Sessions Trial No. 226/98, by which the appellant has been convicted under section 376 (1) of IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years with a fine of Rs. 5,000/ - with a default stipulation.
(2.) IN brief, the story of the prosecution is that on 5.1.1998 in the early morning at about 4 am, the prosecutrix (PW 1) was sleeping alongwith her children in her house, her husband had gone to the field. Appellant came and pushed the door by which the door was opened. He brought the prosecutrix from the room to the courtyard and threw her on the ground. Then he removed her clothes and committed sexual intercourse with her. When the act was completed, the prosecutrix cried. On hearing her cries, Brajlal (PW 9) came there and appellant ran away from the spot. Prosecutrix (PW 1) informed all the incidents to Brajlal. In the morning, her husband Natha (PW 2) when came to the house, he informed about the incident. She alongwith her husband went to the police station and lodged the report at the Police Station Narbar which is Ex. P -2. She was examined by doctor and x -ray was also taken. The report of the prosecutrix is Ex. P -4 which is not positive regarding the commission of rape. After completion of investigation, charge -sheet was filed. The learned trial Court after conclusion of trial and perusing the evidence from the record, found the appellant guilty under section 376 (1) of IPC and convicted him as stated in above para one of this judgment.
(3.) ON the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor for the State submits, that from the testimony of the prosecutrix (PW 1), it appears that on the date of incident, appellant committed sexual intercourse against her will. Her son Raghuveer (PW 3) was locked by the appellant so, he could not come out from the room. Therefore, the learned trial Court has rightly convicted the appellant.