RAJESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH THROUGH
LAWS(CHH)-2020-1-140
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH
Decided on January 23,2020

RAJESH KUMAR Appellant
VERSUS
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

ALAMELU VS. STATE BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE [REFERRED TO]
SUBELAL VS. STATE OF M P [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

GAUTAM CHOURDIYA,J. - (1.)This appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 19.05.2001 passed by the Special Judge (Prevention of Atrocities Act), Surguja, Ambikapur (C.G.) in Special Criminal Case No. 04 of 2000, whereby the Appellant stands convicted and sentence as under:-
Conviction

Sentence

Under Section 376 of Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC')

R.I. for seven years and pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment to further undergo R.I. for six months

Under Section 366 of IPC

R.I. for three years and pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment to further undergo R.I. for six months

Both sentences to run concurrently

(2.)The case of the prosecution in brief is that when the prosecutrix (PW-7) was at her home on 07.11.1999, the appellant, who is neighbour of the prosecutrix, came to her home saying that I cannot live without you (prosecutrix) and he proposed her for marriage, thereafter, he abducted the prosecutrix from the lawful guardianship of her father. Thereafter, the appellant took the prosecutrix to the house of Subhash (PW-1) where both stayed for two days and during this period, the appellant committed sexual intercourse against the will of the prosecutrix. When father of the prosecutrix came to know that the prosecutrix was in the house of Subhash, her father alongwith Sarda Prasad Guruji (PW-2) went there and took the prosecutrix to his home, then the prosecutrix told her father about the incident. At the time of incident, the prosecutrix was a minor below 16 years of age. F.I.R. (Ex.-P/16) was lodged by the prosecutrix (PW-7) on 09.11.1999 at about 11:20 am in the police station Outpost Raghunathnagar. The prosecutrix was sent for medical examination. PW-10 Dr.(Smt.) Shashiprabha examined the prosecutrix and gave her report Ex.-P/23 in which she opined that there was no external injury present over the body of the prosecutrix but she opined that intercourse must had been performed within two days. She (Dr.) also prepared two slides from vaginal swab and advised for chemical examination of the same.
(3.)During investigation undergarments of the prosecutrix were seized vide seizure memo Ex.-P/2. Spot map was prepared vide Ex.-P/3. One certificate (Ex.-P/5) regarding age of the prosecutrix was obtained from Head Master of Middle School, Raghunathnagar and photocopy of Admission & Discharge Register (Ex.-P/9C) were seized through Ex.-P/6, according to which, her date of birth is 23.08.1986. One undergarment of the accused/appellant was also seized vide Ex.-P/13.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.