CHHAGAN LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal has been preferred by the accused appellant Chhaganlal, who has been convicted and sentenced as below vide the judgment dated 26.10.2012 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.1, Udaipur.

(2.) Facts in brief are that a written report (Ex.P/1) was filed by Shri Ganpatlal with the Superintendent of Police, Udaipur on 26.08.2009 alleging inter alia that six months ago, the accused appellant Chhaganlal entered his house at Chirwa taking advantage of his daughter being alone; took off the clothes of the girl and subjected her to sexual assault. When she started shouting and crying, he threatened her that if she told anyone about the incident, she would be killed. In this manner, Chhaganlal continued to establish forcible sexual relations with her over the period of previous six months. Mst. 'S' conceived because of the forced sexual relations. On 23.08.2009 Chhaganlal took Mst. 'S' to Udaipur in a Jeep and got her aborted in some unknown hospital. In the next morning, he boarded her on to a bus going to Chirwa. When Mst. 'S' returned home, she was quite frightened and was feeling difficulty in moving around. She shared these events with her mother, whereafter, the report came to be lodged. On the basis of this report, an FIR No.180/2009 was registered at the Police Station Sukher for the offences under Sections 452, 376 and 366-A IPC After conclusion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the accused for the offences under Sections 454, 376 and 363 IPC. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions Judge, Udaipur, from where, the same was transferred for trial to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.1, Udaipur. The trial court framed charges for the above offences against the accused appellant, who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution examined as many as 12 witnesses and exhibited 11 documents in support of its case. The accused appellant, upon being examined under Section 313 CrPC denied the prosecution allegations, but did not lead any evidence in defence. The trial court upon conclusion of the trial proceeded to convict and sentence the appellant as above. Hence, this appeal.

(3.) In the alternative, he submitted that as the minimum sentence of 7 years is provided for the offence and the imprisonment for life can only be awarded as an exception and the court would have to record special reasons handing down the maximum sentence. In this regard, he placed reliance on the judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunil Dutt Sharma Vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) reported in (2014) 4 SCC 375 and Division Bench judgment of this court in the case of Sandeep Vs. State of Rajasthan (D.B. Criminal Appeal No.633/2013 decided on 07.08.2018) and urged as an alternative that the sentence awarded to the appellant may be suitably reduced to a term of 7 years.