PRAVEEN @ RAJ Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal under section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been preferred by the appellant being aggrieved of the judgment dated 19/07/2014 passed by the Special Judge under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short "POCSO Act"), Chhindwara in Special ST No.28/2014, whereby the present appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_55_LAWS(MPH)3_2019_1.html</FRM>

(2.) The appellant has been convicted under the provisions of Penal Code instead of POCSO Act as so far as the present case is concerned, the provisions of Penal Code are more stringent then the POCSO Act and provides harsher punishment.

(3.) In brief the facts of the case are that on 5.2.2014 when the prosecutrix (PW-1) was working with Kaleem @ Akeel Jhulewala as Ticket Collector with whom accused/appellant Praveen also used to work, at around 7 O'clock in the evening appellant Praveen took the prosecutrix to nearby hut where he committed rape on her and on the other day he took the prosecutrix to his uncle's house at Sitapur and from where to his maternal aunt and before the police could reach him, he again took her nearby a jungle and kept her in a hut overnight and from where he took her to an orange orchard where he kept her for four days and committed rape upon her on many times. Again he took her to the same orange orchard and asked her to stay there only and left her saying that he is going in search for some work and when the owner of the orange orchard came there and saw her, the prosecutrix took his mobile and called her father but before her father could come, accused Praveen again came back and told her that since no work is available here they have to go to Nagpur. Thus they went to Nagpur where also the prosecutrix borrowed a mobile from a person and informed her father that she is at Buldi Nagpur near the big gate of Cinemax, at that time, the parents of the prosecutrix came there with police and arrested the accused. After due investigation, the charge sheet was filed and the learned Special Judge of the trial Court after recording the evidence has convicted the appellant as aforesaid.