JAI PAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant was the accused on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Jhunjhunu bearing Sessions Case No. 106 of 1994. He was found guilty under section 366A and 376 of the Indian Penal Code convicted thereunder and sentenced to undergo five years Rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000.00 and 10 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000.00 (in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months rigorous imprisonment). It was also directed that the sentences shall run concurrently.

(2.) Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence the present action had been resorted to.

(3.) Brief resume of the facts is that informant Phoola Ram, instituted FIR with the Police Station Kotwali Jhunjhunu on July 14, 1994 alleging therein that his daughter Suman aged six years returned home weeping. There were marks of teeth bite on both of her cheeks, on enquiry she told him that Jaipal (appellant) on the pretext of giving her copy and book took her to a lonely place outside the village. There he removed her clothes and made her lie on the ground and raped her. Case under Sec. 363 and 376 Penal Code was registered against the appellant and investigation commenced. Charge sheet was filed and case was committed to the court of Sessions Judge where charges under section 366A and 376 Penal Code were framed. The appellant denied the charges and claimed trial. The prosecution examined as many as fifteen witnesses. Thereafter statement of the appellant under section 313 Crimial P.C. was recorded. The appellant produced twelve documents but did not examine defence witness. The learned trial court after hearing the arguments convicted the appellant as indicated here in above.