HAKAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred by the appellant under section 374 (2) of the Cr.P.C , 1973 being aggrieved by the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 23.6.1997 passed by the Sessions Judge, Narsinghpur in S.T. No.146/96 whereby the appellant has been convicted for commission of offence punishable under Section 376 of the I.P.C and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 7 years along with fine of Rs. 500/- with default stipulation.

(2.) Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 13.2.1996 nearabout 5.30 p.m. the prosecutrix was working at her field situated at village Noni Police Station Gotegaon, where the appellant who is elder brother of her husband, came and committed sexual intercourse with her forcefully. After few hours when her husband came, she narrated the entire incident to him and went to Police Station, lodge the FIR. On the way to the Police Station, she met her brother Chandan Singh (PW-5) and she narrated the incident to him and went to the Police Station, Gotegaon where she lodged the FIR (Ex.P/2). After investigation, charge-sheet was filed before the C.J.M. Narsinghpur and the case was committed to the Sessions Court. The learned Sessions Court framed the charge against the appellant. The appellant abjured the guilt. His defence was that he is innocent and on account of dispute with the husband of the prosecutrix with regard to demarcation of the land, he has been falsely implicated. The trial Court after completion of trial found the appellant guilty of the offence and convicted and sentenced him as aforementioned. Hence, this appeal has been preferred.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the finding of the learned trial Court is illegal, erroneous and contrary to law. The statement of the prosecutrix is not supported by any independent evidence and in defence, statement of Kabir Das (DW-1) and Dayawant (DW-2) has been recorded but they have not been considered in right perspective and the appellant has been convicted. Even the prosecution has failed to establish the charge beyond the reasonable doubt. Hence, the appeal may be allowed and conviction and sentence be set aside and appellant be acquitted.