SHYOJI RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 7. 6. 2000 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Tonk whereby accused-appellant Shyojiram has been convicted for the offence under Section 376 (2) (f) IPC and sentenced to suffer R. I. for ten years and a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to further suffer R. I. for one month.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the prosecution case are that on 7. 11. 1998 at 4. 30 p. m. , PW1 Sitaram S/o Arjun, by caste-Balai, R/o Hisampur submitted a written report Ex. P1 to SHO, P. S. Devli wherein it was, interalia, stated that yesterday around 2. 30 p. m. his daughter Rajee, aged 10 years had gone to his field to watch the mustered crop. At 6. 00 p. m. she returned to home. She was crying and she told him that Shyoji Uncle (accused-appellant) came in the field and asked her to accompany him to eat `ber' (plum) and thereafter took her to a nearby place where `babool' trees were standing and committed rape on her. It was also stated in Ex. P. 1 that blood was oozing from the vagina of his daughter whereupon he along with his daughter went to village Baghera and contacted Govind Singh, Compounder (PW10), who gave treatment to his daughter. It was further stated in Ex. P1 that Govind Singh, Compounder advised him to report the matter to the police. Today he has come to report the matter. Blood stained clothes which the prosecutrix was wearing at the time of the incident, were also produced before the SHO. On the basis of written report Ex. P1, the SHO registered FIR Ex. P2 and investigated the case. On completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the accused-appellant in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tonk, who committed the case to the Court of Sessions Judge, Tonk. On transfer the file was received in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Tonk.

(3.) LEARNED Public Prosecutor appearing for the State has supported the impugned judgment and submitted that delay in lodging the FIR has been satisfactorily explained by the prosecution, medical evidence corroborates the version of the prosecutrix, the testimony of the prosecutrix stands corroborated by the testimony of his father PW1 Sitaram and mother PW3 Prem and there is nothing on record to prove the previous enmity between the father of the prosecutrix and the accused-appellant and, therefore, the appeal of the appellant be dismissed.