SITA RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being convicted under Section 376 IPC and sentenced to suffer seven years' rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default, to undergo further one month's rigorous imprisonment, the appellant has challenged the judgment and order dated 7.6.1989 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Tonk in Sessions Case No.32/87. The prosecution case is traceable to an information lodged on 20.2.1987 by Ram Prasad, father of the victim Uganta with the Police Station, Sadar Tonk, alleging that on 19.2.1987 at about 4:00/5:00 p.m., while his said daughter, aged about six years was at a nearby well alongwith her younger brother, the appellant committed rape on her. The informant mentioned that having heard the cries of her daughter, he rushed to the place of occurrence and saw bleeding injuries in her private parts. He mentioned about the presence of one Gopal and his wife at the site as well. According to him, he could not immediately lodge the information due to the non-availability of means of transport. On the basis of the information, the police registered a case under Sections 342, 376 & 323 IPC. When confronted with the charge, the accused denied the same and was thus made to stand trial. The prosecution thereafter examined 12 witnesses and also exhibited several documents. The appellant stood by his denial of the charge in course of his examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C. However, he declined to adduce any evidence in defence. On the conclusion of the trial, by the impugned judgment and order, he was convicted and sentenced as above.

(2.) Before weighing the arguments advanced, it would be appropriate to record the evidence of the relevant witnesses in short.

(3.) Pw-1, the informant stated that on the date of the occurrence, while he and his wife were working on the field, their daughter Uganti aged about 6/7 years alongwith her younger brother, was at a nearby well. It was about 4:00/5:00 p.m. in the evening. The witness stated that he on hearing the cries of his daughter, went near the well and saw the appellant committing rape on her. He mentioned that then, his wife also reached the spot followed by Gopal. He proved the FIR. In cross-examination, this witness stated that he found his daughter lying about a feet away from the well. He also stated that at the time of the incident, his wife was about 15 feet away from the place of occurrence.