- (1.) A little girl of five years of age was ravished by the respondent on 4th January, 1985 at about 2.00 p.m., taking advantage of her helpless state.
(2.) The respondent, a neighbour of the prosecutrix living almost opposite her house was tried for an offence under S. 376, IPC on an FIR lodged by the father of the prosecutrix. The version of the prosecutrix regarding the commission of offence by the respondent, as narrated in Court through her mother, P.W. 1 received ample corroboration from medical evidence and other evidence led in the case. We are not repeating the prosecution version of the case or gist of the evidence led in case for the simple reason that the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, West Godavari, after recording evidence and hearing parties, both on the question of conviction and sentence, vide order dated 9th September, 1985, convicted the respondent for an offence under S. 376, IPC. After taking into account report of District Probation Officer, relating to the character, conduct and antecedents of the respondent, the trial Court awarded a sentence of 10 years RI and a fine of Rs. 10/-, and in default, simple imprisonment for one week for the said offence. The convict filed an appeal, challenging his conviction and sentence, which came to be heard by a learned single Judge of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh. The learned single Judge, vide judgment, dated 15th September, 1987, 'entirely' agreed with the conclusions arrived at by the trial Court and confirmed the conviction of the respondent for an offence under S. 376, IPC. However, the sentence was reduced to a period of five years R.I., while maintaining the sentence of fine and imprisonment in default of payment of fine.
(3.) The respondent has not filed any appeal challenging his conviction and sentence.;