PURAN PRASAD KURU Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the parties.

(2.) Md. Zaid Ahmed, learned counsel for the appellant, submits that there is no material to convict the appellant in this case. The Doctor has not found any mark of violence on the victim. Further, there is delay of six days in lodging the F.I.R. The reason for false implication is the land dispute between the parties.

(3.) Learned counsel for the State has defended the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence and submitted that the appellant has committed sexual assault upon the victim girl who is aged about six years. So far as the medical report is concerned, he submits that the doctor supports the prosecution version to the effect that the girl was sexually assaulted. The victim P.W.-5 also supports the prosecution case. Thus there is no ground to acquit this appellant.