MUNNA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by the accused appellant-Munna @ Prem Chand against the judgment dated April 27, 1985 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Sawaimadhopur whereby the appellant has been acquitted of the charge under section 376 Penal Code but convicted for the offence under section 354 Penal Code but convicted for the offence under section 354 Penal Code and sentenced to two years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 50.00 and in default of payment of fine to further undergo 15 days rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the prosecution case are that on Sept. 5, 1982 at about 3.00 PM when PW 2 Mst. Prem by caste Meena resident of Mandawar, was taking both on the well of Shankarlal Bagda, the appellant-Munna came there and said that he also would take bath. Thereafter, the appellant Munna showed Barfi (sweetdish) and a currency-note of Rs. 10.00 to Mst. Prem and asked her to accompany him to a field of Bajra crop but Mst. Prem refused to accompany him. On her refusal the appellant caught 1 hold of her hand, lifted and took her at the field and put her on the ground for committing rape on her. Mst. Prem made hue and cry. At that time' Hari Brahmin was passing through the way on his cycle. On hearing Must Prems cry Hari Brahmin asked that "who are there -, whereupon the appellant ran away. Mst. Prem came to her house and narrated the incident to her mother. PW 1 Dhapa submitted a written report Ex.P1 at PS Mandawar at 6.30 PM. On the basis of the written report SHO PS Mandawar registered a case under section 376/511 Penal Code and investigation commenced. Formal FIR is Ex.P2. On completion of the investigation a charge-sheet was laid against the appellant in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Hindauncity who committed the case to the court of learned Sessions Judge, Sawai Madhopur.

(3.) Learned Sessions Judge framed charge under section 376 Penal Code against the appellant. The appellant denied the charge and claimed to be tried. Thereafter the prosecution examined as many as 9 witnesses. In his statement recorded under section 313 Cr.RC. the appellant pleaded innocence. He further stated that 25-30 days before the alleged incident the marriage ceremony of his brother had taken place and during that ceremony utensils belonging to his family were stolen. They asked the complainant party who is his neighbour about the stolen utensils. Because of this the complainant party became angry and lodged a false case against him. In defence no witness was examined.