FAROOQ Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal under Sec. 374 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the accused-appellant laid a challenge to the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 10/8/1999 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Cases, Pratapgarh in Special Sessions Case No.57/98 (State of Rajasthan vs. Farooq), whereby the accused-appellant has been convicted and sentenced as below:

(2.) The salient facts of the case, as discerned by this Hon'ble Court, reveal that one Ratni, belonging to the Khatik caste, lodged an oral report at Police Station Bhadesar. She stated that after visiting Avri Mata Temple from her village and having Darshan, she was returning in Sanwariyaji's Bus. She alleged that a man standing near her in the Bus made inquiries and introduced himself as Farooq. He accompanied her until Bhadsora Chauraha where he offered her sugar-cane juice, which she declined. Despite her refusal, he allegedly forced her to disembark and drink the sugar-cane juice. During that time, the Bus, in which, she had been travelling departed. Farooq then offered her to drop on his motorcycle. They proceeded from Chauraha to Sanwariyaji Bus stand, where Farooq retrieved his motorcycle and took her to Chittorgarh. She alleged that she was threatened, which prevented her from disclosing the incident to anyone. They watched a Cinema in Chittorgarh until 9 o'clock. Thereafter, they returned to Asawara Mata, where they went to sleep in Farooq's Ghumti. She further alleged that at about 2 o'clock in the night, Farooq removed her clothes and, threatening her with dire consequences, forcibly had sexual intercourse with her. When she shouted, some individuals standing outside the Ghumti approached, but departed upon seeing Farooq. Subsequently, Farooq closed the window of the Ghumti and offered her Rs.500.00 for her silence, then instructed her to return home. She thereafter, located the address of the Police Station and reported the matter.

(3.) Mr. Rajiv Bishnoi, learned counsel appearing for the accused- appellant, submits that the prosecution's case lacks testimony of eyewitness, complete chain of circumstantial evidence, Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) reports, medical evidence of injury or any kind of doctor's evidence, which could attribute the rape to the present accused-appellant, therefore, the sole material evidence relied upon by the prosecution is the statement of the prosecutrix, rendered in her capacity as PW-2.