MITTHU Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed by the appellant against his conviction under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentence of ten years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000/ -. According to the prosecution, it is alleged that the appellant has committed rape upon a minor girl of about seven years of age. The rape upon the prosecutrix is not established by the medical evidence. PW 10 Dr. Usha Gurha has medically examined the prosecutrix and could not give any opinion in respect of commission of rape upon the prosecutrix. The doctor has found that there were no injury on the body of the prosecutrix. The prosecutrix has not complained any pain while separating her thigh. There was no redness or near private parts. No bleeding was found in the private parts or near about the private parts. Secondary characters were not found developed. The doctor found her hymen to be intact. The slides of the swab were prepared but its chemical examination report was not filed in the Court. The doctor has admitted that the girl of this age is subjected to rape, then her hymen is likely to be ruptured.

(2.) SINCE the girl was of the tender age of 7/8 years, the opinion in respect of commission of rape can only be given by medical expert. In the present case, there is no medical evidence to demonstrate that the prosecutrix was subjected to rape. The trial Court has convicted the appellant ignoring the medical evidence. Since the medical evidence has not supported commission of rape upon the prosecutrix, it will not be safe to convict the appellant under section 376 Indian Penal Code.