MALU RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED Counsel Shri Thakur for the appellant accused submitted that the Trial Court has committed an error in convicting the accused for the offence punishable under Section 376/511 IPC. He submitted that it was a case of consent. He further submitted that at the best the accused could have been convicted for the offence under Section 511 IPC. In alternative, he submitted that sentence of one year R.I. imposed by the Trial Court be reduced to the sentence already undergone. In support of this submission, he has placed reliance on a judgment of this Court reported in 1989 Rajasthan Criminal Cases page 276, Milkha Singh v. State.

(2.) FIRST submission of Mr. Thakur cannot be accepted for the simple reason that there was evidence of the prosecutrix herself, who has deposed that not only there was an attempt to commit rape, but there was actual rape committed on her by the accused. When her evidence is not shaken in cross -examination then there is no reason for this Court to dis -believe her evidence. The Trial Court has also rightly relied upon her evidence for convicting the accused for the offence under Section 376/511 IPC.

(3.) IN view of the above discussion, I do not find any substance or merit in this appeal, accordingly this appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. The accused is on bail. His bail bonds stands cancelled. He shall now surrender within one month from today, failing which non -bailable warrant may be issued against him.