STATE OF M. P. Vs. DAYARAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against the respondent's acquittal of charges under Ss. 306, 325 and 376, I.P.C., recorded by the Sessions Judge, Mandsaur, in Session Trial No. 14 of 1984, vide judgment dated 30 -10 -1984.

(2.) PROSECUTION case in brief was that on 24 -9 -1983, by 5.00 p.m., the prosecutrix -Awantibai, a mother of two children, aged about 30 years, was cutting maize in her field, when the accused came there and drank away water from a 'LOTA', which was kept by and meant for the prosecutrix. He took away her towel and snatched away her sickle and threw it aside. The prosecutrix started shouting when she was caught, but the accused gagged her mouth and dragged her to an adjoining field belonging to one Mangilal, where she was felled to the ground by the accused, who squat over her. As she tried to cry, the accused gave fist blows on her mouth, resulting injuries to her lips, gums and jaws. The accused also thrusted the towel in her mouth and committed rape on her at the point of knife. On Nanuram (P.W. 3), hearing her cries, rushed to the spot, the accused took to his heels, leaving the prosecutrix behind, who later on returned home. On return of her husband, she narrated the incident to him. Next day in the morning her husband Babulal (P.W. 4), accompanied by Bherulal (P.W. 6) and one Chunnilal, went to the police station Rampura, where first -information report, Ex. P/1, was lodged by him. Awantibai was sent for medical examination. She was examined by Dr. Miss Leela Dabar (P.W. 2) on 25 -9 -1983. As per her report, Ex. P/2, following injuries were found on her person : 1. Ecchymosis 1/1 -2" x 1/2" right side of cheek; 2. Linear abrasion below the nose, on the left side 1" x 1/4", 3. Swelling of lower lip, left side; 4. The upper incisor of right side and lower incisor are loose. 6. Nails abrasion of left side of breaste. Two in number. 7. Linear abrasion transversely about 1" on right side of breast.

(3.) ON completion of investigation the accused was prosecuted for the aforesaid offences. His defence was that of false implication. According to him Babulal. (P.W. 4), Anantibai's husband, owed him Rs.1300/ -as price of fodder, which he did not pay and with the help of active connivance of Bherulal (P. W, 6), the Sarpanch of the village, he got him falsely implicated in this case. Prosecution examined as many as nine witnesses to prove the charge. Accused also examined three witnesses in defence. The trial Court, however, held the prosecution witnesses as not reliable and prosecution case bas not proved, acquitted the accused. Hence this appeal.