ARJUN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal under Sec. 374(2), Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the judgment and order dated 11.7.2003 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Banswara, Camp Kushalgarh (for short, "the trial court") in Sessions Case No. 11/2002, whereby the trial court convicted the appellant for the offences under Sections 342 and 376 Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo ten years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2000.00 and in default of payment of fine further to undergo one year's imprisonment for the offence under Sec. 376 IPC; and one year's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500.00 and in default of payment of fine further to undergo one month's imprisonment for the offence under Sec. 342 IPC. Aggrieved by the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the appellant has preferred the instant appeal.

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts, to the extent they are relevant and necessary for the decision of this appeal, are that PW 4 Makhla filed a typed-report Ex.P/2 with the Police Station, Kushalgarh on 24.11.2001, on which the police registered the FIR Ex.P/3, wherein it was alleged that on 30.10.2001, at about 3.00 PM while his daughter PW 5 Basanti, aged about 7 years, was coming to her house after grazing the cattle, the accused-appellant wrongfully restrained her and committed rape on her. She came to her house and informed this occurrence to her mother PW 6 Maddi. In the evening when he arrived at his house, he was informed by his wife about the occurrence. PW 5 Basanti could not say anything. It was alleged that two days before lodging the report, Basanti informed that the appellant committed rape on her. When inquired from the appellant, he said to go for compromise. In the FIR, it has specifically been stated that only two days before lodging the report, they came to know about the occurrence.

(3.) The prosecution examined PW 1 Kamji and PW 2 Gamna, both are witnesses to the site inspection note; PW 3 Java, is said to have been informed of the occurrence by PW 4 Makhla; PW 4 Makhla, the father of the prosecutrix; PW 5 Basanti, the prosecutrix; PW 6 Maddi, the mother of the prosecutrix; PW 7 Nathu Lal Arya, the investigating officer; PW 8 Dr. Laxman Kumar Verma, who medically examined the prosecutrix; PW 9 Dr. Rajendra Ujjania, who medically examined the accused-appellant; and PW 10 Shyam Lal Meena, another investigating officer. The prosecution produced the documents Ex.P/1 to Ex.P/7. The accused-appellant made statement under Sec. 313 Cr.RC. and denied the allegations and confronted PW 4 Makhla with his police statement Ex.D/1. On the conclusion of the trial, the appellant was convicted and sentenced as noticed above.