TULSI RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) JUDGMENT :- This jail appeal was preferred by the appellant from jail and amicus curiae was appointed by this Court.

(2.) Appellant-Tulsi Ram was convicted for offences under Ss. 376 and 342, IPC by learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Chittaurgarh on 13-4-1998. He was sentenced to seven years' simple imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 200/- and in default to undergo one month's simple imprisonment. He was sentenced to one month's simple imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 100/- and in default to undergo 15 days simple imprisonment for offence under S. 342, IPC. It was ordered that both the substantive sentences shall run concurrently. Aggrieved by this conviction and sentence he preferred this appeal.

(3.) Briefly stated, on 30-10-1996 Sayri reported to Station House Officer, Bhensroadgarh that on 29-10-1996 she had gone to the field of her brother in order to dig peanuts. She worked there up to 5-6 O'clock. She was returning to Ladpura and when she reached near the field of Bhanwarlal, appellant suddenly pounched upon her and caught hold. She wanted to cry but her mouth was gagged. Appellant lifted her and took to the place near the field of Bhanwarlal under a tree. He threatened her that if she made hue and cry she would be killed. Then the appellant committed rape with her. She was kept by the appellant for whole of night and during this period the appellant committed rape twice. The semen of the appellant spoiled her 'ghaghra' and 'lugri.' Appellant had tied her hands with her 'lugri.' In the morning he went away to wash his face, then Sayri ran away to the field of her in-laws. The elder brother of her father-in-law Shankar and his son Shambhu were present who untied her hands and also took out the 'lugri' from her mouth. Then she narrated the whole story to them. Shambhu went to Gopalpura and brought her brother Shyama whom the story was narrated. She came to Gopalpura with her brother Shyama and narrated the story to her parents. Then a report was lodged at police station Bhensroadgarh where a case under Ss. 376 and 342, I.P.C. was registered, investigated and then the appellant was challenged. Learned Magistrate having jurisdiction committed the case to the learned Sessions Judge who framed charges under Ss. 376 and 342, I.P.C. against the appellant, read them over and explained. The appellant denied his indictment and claimed trial. Prosecution examined 21 witnesses in support of its case. Then the appellant was examined under S. 313, Cr. P.C. Learned Sessions Judge, after hearing both the parties, convicted and sentenced the appellant as stated above.