DINESH KUMAR Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants have preferred this criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. challenging the conviction and sentence passed on 13.08.2010 by Special Judge (under the S.C. and S.T. POA Act, 1989) Dindori in Special Case No. 06/2009, wherein the appellants have been convicted for offence under Section 342 of the IPC and sentenced to six months R.I. with fine of Rs. 500/- and for offence under Section 376(2)(g) of IPC R.I. for 10 years with fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in lieu of fine they are to undergo one month R.I. and six months R.I., each.

(2.) Before the learned Trial Court the factual matrix of the prosecution case was that the prosecutirx belong to Duliya by caste which false under the "ST category". On 29.05.2009 at about 3:00 p.m., the prosecutrix aged about 30 years, had gone to the house of the appellant No. 1, Dinesh Kumar to ask for her wages. The appellant No. 1, Dinesh Kumar and his associate appellant No. 2, Indrabhan were present there. Appellant No. 2 forcible quite her and pushed into the room. The appellant No. 1, Dinesh Kumar then locked the room from the outside and fled away. Appellant No. 2, Indrabhan committed rape with the prosecutrix by gagging her mouth with a cloth. Witnesses is Suna, Panne Lal, Dayal, Sukarit, Kuvarlal came there and opened the door and the prosecutrix was taken out. She narrated the incident to the witness. As it was dark and she had no conveyance convenience, she could not lodge report on the same day. On the following day she lodged report Ex. P/2 at the Police Station. On the basis of, which investigation was initiated. The prosecutrix was sent for medical examination After completing the investigation charge sheet has been filed.

(3.) On the committal of the case to the Special Court under the SC and ST (Protection of Atrocities) Act, 1989, (for brevity Act, 1989) Dindori charges have been framed for offence under Sections 342, 376(1), 376(2)(g) of IPC, and Section 3(1)(2) and 3(2)(5) of Act 1989. The accused persons abjured guilt and pleaded innocence.