PRAHLAD @ GUDDU Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 31/10/2013 passed by the 2nd Additional Session Judge, Waraseoni, District Balaghat, in Session Trial No.221/2012 whereby the appellant has been convicted for commission of offence punishable under section 376(2)(i) of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years with fine of Rs.5000/-, with default further 1 year R.I.

(2.) The facts giving rise to this appeal are that on 10/11/2012 near about 9.30 am the prosecutrix (PW-1) aged near about 5 years was taken by the appellant in the hutment used for keeping the cattle situated near the house of the prosecutrix, where the appellant committed sexual intercourse with her.

(3.) The incident was narrated by the prosecutrix to her mother Ramkali (PW-2) and she also found swelling and reddishness on the private part of her daughter and the prosecutrix was complaining about the pain on her private part, then she called villagers Dasharam (PW-3), Ishrat Uike (PW-4), Laxmi Chand (PW-5) and Ambelal (PW-8) and narrated the incident to them and the prosecutrix also narrated the incident to them. Thereafter mother of prosecutrix Ramkali (PW-2) lodged FIR Ex.P-1 at police station Katangi District Balaghat, which was registered at Crime No. 212/2012 under section 376 of IPC and after completion of the investigation, the charge sheet was filed against the appellant before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Katangi, who commited the case to the Session Court Balaghat, and after getting the case on transfer 2nd Additional Session Judge, Waraseoni tried it. The defence of the appellant was that he has been falsely implicated and learned trial court after completion of the trial has convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned above.