DHANU RAM SOREN Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has preferred this appeal against the Judgment of Conviction and Order of Sentence dtd. 21/2/2013 passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Seraikella-Kharsawan in Sessions Trial No.128 of 2011, whereby the appellant has been held guilty and convicted for the offence punishable under Ss. 376 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and a fine of Rs.10,000.00.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant submits that from the evidence recorded by the prosecution in this case, appellant could not have been convicted under Sec. 376 of the Indian Penal Code. Further, it is his contention that when the Trial Court has acquitted the appellant for the charge under Sec. 420 of the Indian Penal Code, then there could not have been conviction under Sec. 376 of the Indian Penal Code on the facts of the case as narrated by the prosecution witnesses. As per the appellant, admittedly, the victim is major and the sexual relationship which was entered by the appellant with the victim is consensual. When there is consensual relationship between the appellant and the victim, the conviction under Sec. 376 of the Indian Penal Code is bad.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that though the parties are major, yet by committing fraud, consent for sexual relationship was obtained, thus, the said consent cannot be treated to be consent. Since the said consent cannot be said to be consent, the Trial Court had rightly convicted the appellant under Sec. 376 of the Indian Penal Code.