LEHRU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant Lehru S/o Onkar aggrieved of his conviction for the offence of Sec. 376 read with 511 Penal Code and awarded sentence of two years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 500 in default two months simple imprisonment as per judgment dated 31.01.89 in Sessions case No. 65/88 before the court of Sessions Judge, Bhilwara, has preferred this appeal.

(2.) Alleged facts leading to prosecution are that on 09.03.88 at 9 PM, Bhuwana lodged report Ex.P/1 at P.S. Gangapur alleging that his daughter Kamla works on Famine relief work who that day as always went for work and returning at 6 PM told him that when relieved from the work of famine relief at 5 the "meth" (incharge of workmen) Lehru S/o Onkar asked her to carry and put empty drum to his house so she carried the drum at his house where no one was and she opening the gate kept the drum came Lehru from outside who embracing and making her fell down and biting on cheek then removing her ghagra, by making it up, tried to enter his organ in hers. She kicked by leg at his chest so he became little distant and she ran away. Also mentioned in the report is that incident was also narrated to Bhuwan, Narayan and Heera lal. On this information, registering FIR Ex.P/2 bearing No. 55/88 for the offence of Sec. 376 and 511 Penal Code directing medical examination of concerned and made SHO visiting the site on next morning prepared memo Ex.P/2 and arrested the accused. After usual investigation, charge-sheet submitted and on committal Sessions Case no. 46/88 registered.

(3.) Prosecution examined prosecutrix PW/1, her father PW/3 Bhuwana, PW/2 Heera lal, Medical officer PW/6, PW/4 incharge P.S who registered FIR and S.I PW/5 the investigating officer. Appellant explained that Bhuwana, Heera lal and Narayan are of same family who were not taken on famine relief work so, he is falsely implicated and all witnesses including PW/1 telling lie. In defence, examined Gopa DW/1 who deposes that he live just opposite to the house of appellant and on that day wife of his elder brother expired and many were there and no such incident as is alleged happened or heard. Learned Judge arrived at conclusion that appellant did attempt rape and accordingly convicted.