DIGAMBER SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has challenged the order dated 12.10.2009 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.2, Bharatpur, whereby he has acquitted accused-respondent No.2 for offence under Section 376/511 IPC.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that on 30.01.2009 at about 7:00 PM a written report was lodged by Ram Singh at the Police Station, Sewar stating therein that while his niece was answering the call of nature in the field, the accused person, Ram Bharosi, caught hold of her and tried to commit rape. The prosecutrix cried; on hearing her cries, Khem Singh, Sumeran Singh and Hop Singh rushed to her rescue. On the basis of the written report, a FIR bearing No.50/2009, for offence under Section 376/511 IPC, was registered. After investigation, challan was filed. In support of the prosecution case, five witnesses were examined, and five documents were exhibited. No witness was examined in defence. After hearing both the parties, the learned trial Court, vide order dated 12.10.2009, acquitted the accused person of the offences under Section 376/511 and 323 IPC. Hence, this revision before this Court.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the prosecutrix was about fifteen years old. According to him, the learned Judge has committed error while concluding that the prosecutrix had consented to the alleged offence. According to him, the question of consent does not arise when the prosecutrix is a minor and the offence is of 376/511 IPC.