RAJVEER SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this appeal a challenge is made to the judgment dated 03.11.1990 passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge, Dholpur in Session Case No.53/89, by which the appellant was convicted for offence under Sections 457 and 376 IPC and sentenced to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo two months rigorous imprisonment for offence under Section 376 IPC, and sentenced to undergo two years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo two months rigorous imprisonment for offence under Section 457 IPC. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant submits that false allegations of commission of offence under Sections 457 and 376 IPC have been levelled against the appellant. It was out of the revenge. The accused and the prosecutrix's husband were working in the mines and were having rivalry with each other. It is only to settle the aforesaid that a story was concocted about commission of offence. It was stated that the accused-appellant entered in the house of the prosecutrix and committed the offence by pointing a 12 bore katta on her breast. The statements of the witnesses were recorded, however no corroborative evidence exist. No independent witness was examined to support the allegation. The medical report is also not supporting the incidence. No injury on the private or other part of the body of the prosecutrix was found. The prosecutrix was habitual of intercourse. In the manner the incident has been narrated, cannot repose confidence. The charge has not been proved beyond doubt, yet the Court below recorded conviction based on probabilities, whereas the charge has to be proved beyond reasonable doubt.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant has made reference of the statements of the witnesses to show that either they have denied the incidence or otherwise their evidence is based on hearsay statement. It has come that the allegations were levelled out of rivalry between the accused and the prosecutrix's husband. PW7 Harpyari, prosecutrix has supported the incidence, which is not supported by corroborative evidence, thus should not have been relied upon by the Court below. The accused-appellant should have been acquitted of the offence. The prayer is accordingly made to allow the appeal and set aside the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence of the accused-appellant for offence under Section 457 and 376 IPC.