JETHIA @ JETHA RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by the accused-Jethia @ Jetha Ram against a judgment dated 11.11.1987 delivered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Hanumangarh.

(2.) According to the prosecution story, the oral FIR (Ex.P/8) was lodged by PW-3 Shimbhu Devi D/o Kana Ram on 14.3.1984 at 8.00 p.m. at P.S. Pilibanga. According to the FIR, she was working in her agricultural field on 13.3.1984 at 1.00 p.m. when the two accused persons Jethia and Devi Lal pounced upon her. Devi Lal caught hold of her and the appellant-Jethia performed sexual intercourse with her. Thereafter both the accused persons took to their heels. The prosecutrix came to her house and narrated the story to her mother (PW-4) Rameshwari. A case under section 447 and 376/34 of the IPC was registered and challan was filed against both of them. Devi Lal was charged for the offence punishable under sections 447 and 376/34 of the IPC. Similarly, the appellant-Jethia was also charged for the offences punishable under sections 447 and 376/34 of the IPC. Both of them pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined six witnesses in support of the prosecution story. None was examined in defence. The learned Trial Court then heard the arguments and delivered judgment on11.11.1987. The co-accused-Devi Lal was acquitted of both the charges. The appellant was found guilty in respect of both the charges. For the offence punishable under Section 447 of the I.P.C., the appellant has been awarded rigorous imprisonment for two months. For the offence punishable under Section 376 of the I.P.C., he has been convicted and ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years as well as a fine of Rs. 500/-. For non-payment of fine, he has been ordered to undergo additional rigorous imprisonment for three months. Hence, this appeal.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned Public Prosecutor for the State and I find that the conclusions drawn by the learned Trial Court are unsustainable. The prosecutrix Shimbhu Devi has been declared hostile by the prosecution and her evidence falls much short of proving the guilt of the accused-appellant.