KAMAL KUMAR Vs. STATE OF H P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant was convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court Kangra at Dharamshala) under Section 376 read with Sections 511 and 354 of the Indian Penal Code. However, he was sentenced only for the major offence i.e. attempt to commit rape, to simple imprisonment for five years and to pay fine of Rs. 50,000/ - if realized, to be paid as compensation to the victim. In default of payment of fine, he was further sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year.

(2.) THE appellant, felt aggrieved and dissatisfied by the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence, thus filed the instant appeal, through Jail on the grounds that the learned trial court did not appreciate the evidence on record in its right perspective and further that no injury marks were found on the person of the prosecutrix and there is nothing on record to conclude that the appellant committed the offence of rape.

(3.) THE prosecutrix was got medically examined on the same day from Dr. Kalpana Negi (PW4). On the local examination, the Doctor found no pubic hair or foreign hair present over the mons and genital areas. Labia majora was normal (pre pubertal). Labia minora were fused. Swabs from mouth, throat, external genetalia and introlitus, slides from forchette and labia were taken for forensic examination. High Vaginal swabs could not be taken because of labial adhesion and the prosecutrix was referred to Gynecologist, for labial separation. On clinical examination, the Doctor opined that the possibility of molestation could not be ruled out. She issued the Medico -legal -certificate Ex.PW4/B. After perusing the report Ex.PA, the Doctor further gave the opinion Ex.PW4/C that possibility of sexual molestation could not be ruled out.