KALU SINGH Vs. NATHU SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ACCUSED- appellant Kalu Singh S/o Shri Natthu Singh has preferred this appeal challenging the impugned judgment and order dated 25th February, 2003, passed by the Special judge, Women Atrocities and Dowry Cases and Additional Sessions Judge, Jaipur City, jaipur, in Sessions Case No. 140/2000, whereby he was convicted and sentenced under Section 376, IPC, to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of rupees one thousand; in default of payment of fine, to further undergo two months additional simple imprisonment.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts of the case are that PW1 Harinarain lodged a written-report (Exhibit P1) dated 24th September, 2000, at Police Station, Sanganer Sadar, jaipur City (South), Jaipur, wherein it was written that at about 9. 50 p. m. he was sitting in his house talking with one Kailash; they saw one mad woman walking outside and one person caught hold of her; that man took her in dark near Ravjani Agriculture field and committed rape. He and Kailash both did not go there. He saw a police jeep coming from Sanganer side; he asked to stop it and told that a person is committing rape with a mad woman. He along with Kailash and police officials went at the place of incident and saw the said person in necked condition committing rape with that mad woman. Thereafter Mahesh, Ramakant and other persons also came there. On asking, he told his name as Kalu Singh and mad woman was disclosing her name as Sushila. On the basis of this information, the police registered FIR No. 190/2000 under Section 376, IPC, and started investigation. The prosecutrix as well as accused both were medically examined.

(3.) AFTER completion of investigation, the police filed a charge-sheet against the accused. The trial Court framed charge against the accused under Section 376, IPC, which was denied and trial was claimed. The prosecution examined 9 witnesses and also produced documentary evidence. The accused, in his statement, recorded under Section 313, Cr. P. C. stated that the case is false and he has not committed any crime. The learned trial Court, after considering evidence on the record and submissions of both the parties, convicted and sentenced the accused-appellant, as mentioned above.