LAXMINARAYAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr.Prithviraj Singh Rajawat, learned counsel for the appellant and Ms.Alka Bhatnagar, learned Public Prosecutor, Rajasthan.

(2.) The present appeal witnesses a challenge to the judgment and order dated 2.8.1990 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jhalawar, District Jhalawar in Sessions Case No.174/89 convicting the appellant under Section 376 IPC and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.100/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for further three months.

(3.) The prosecution case, in short, is that on 6.7.1989 a verbal information was lodged by Ms.Leela Bai, the prosecutrix with Police Station, Jhalrapatan alleging that in the previous evening i.e.5.7.1989 at about 5:00 p.m., while she was returning him from the market, the appellant, on the way, grabbed her from behind, fell her on the ground, throttled and assaulted her, and thereafter, committed forcible sexual intercourse with her. On receipt of the report, the police registered a criminal case, commenced investigation and eventually, submitted challan against the appellant under Section 376 IPC. The appellant denied the charge and was therefore, made to stand trial. The prosecution examined the prosecutrix, Leela Bai and others, including Dr.Tejveer Singh Chhadha who had medically examined her to ascertain the veracity of the allegation of rape. The appellant in course of his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C., denied the charge. He was however, convicted and sentenced as above. The learned counsel for the appellant dismissed the authenticity of the prosecution case, to start with, on the ground of unexplained delay in laying of the information of the incident with the police. Mr.Rajawat further contended that the manner in which the alleged incident had been narrated it is wholly unbelievable, the place of occurrence being a public thoroughfare. The learned counsel further argued that the medical evidence also totally belied the same.