AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This appeal has been preferred by the appellant under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by the judgement dated 25.08.1999 passed by Special Judge (Atrocities) Narsinghpur in Special Case No. 11/1999. The appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under :
Section
Act
Sentence
Fine
In default of fine
363
Indian Penal Code
3 years
Rs. 1,000/-
R.I. for 3 months
366
Indian Penal Code
5 years
Rs. 1,000/-
R.I. for 6 months
376
Indian Penal Code
7 years
Rs. 5,000/-
R.I. for 1 year
As per the prosecution story, on 17.05.1995, the appellant who was known to the prosecutrix, kidnapped her from the safe custody of her parents and took her to Bombay and other places. On the pretext of marriage, he committed rape with her and threatened her. In the meanwhile, the appellant got prepared the marriage certificate which was signed by the prosecutrix. After 28-30 days, the prosecutrix returned to her house and lodged FIR on 19.07.1995. Thereafter, MLC was conducted which confirmed that intercourse was committed with the prosecutrix. After due investigation, charge-sheet was filed by the police.
After committal of the case, learned trial Court framed charges under Sections 363, 366, 376 and 506-B of IPC and Section 3(1)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. On the basis of the evidence available on record, learned trial Court convicted the appellant under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code and awarded sentence as mentioned above.
Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the findings of the trial Court are illegal and perverse, therefore, liable to be set aside. Hence, the appellant is liable to be acquitted from the charges levelled against him.
Learned Panel Lawyer for the State has opposed the contentions of the counsel for the appellant.
Heard learned counsel for the parties at length. Perused the record.
The conviction of the appellant is mainly based on the testimony of the prosecutrix. It is alleged that at the time of the incident i.e. on 17.05.1995, the prosecutrix was a minor. However, to prove her age as mentioned in the marksheet (Ex. P/2) no witness has been examined from the school nor the admission register has been exhibited by the prosecution. The prosecutrix herself stated that her date of birth was 23.06.1980 but her mother Pushplata (PW-2), although stated that the date was 23rd June, however, she was unable to recall the year of birth. Further, Narayan Singh - father of the prosecutrix was not examined by the prosecution.
The learned trial Court has held that on the date of incident, the prosecutrix was a minor. This finding of the trial Court is based only on the assumptions and presumptions, hence, this Court is not inclined to accept the aforesaid findings as proved. Hence, it is held that at the time of commission of offence, prosecutrix was not a minor girl.
From the testimony of the prosecutrix, it is apparently clear that the appellant was known to her. She had accompanied the appellant from Narsinghpur to Bombay on her free will without any resistance from her part. Thereafter, she traveled from Bombay to other places with the appellant on train but she neither informed anyone nor complained against the appellant. After leaving her house, she resided with the appellant for about 28 days. In her statement, she has nowhere stated that the appellant restrained or confined her due to which she was unable to escape. All these material facts have been ignored by the trial court.
In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and on perusal of the entire record so also the findings recorded by the trial Court in the impugned judgment, I am inclined to allow this appeal.
Accordingly, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed. He is acquitted from the charge of offences under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code. He is on bail. His bail bonds stands discharged.
Copy of this judgment along with the record be sent to the Court below for information and necessary compliance.