- (1.) UNDER challenge in this appeal is the judgment and order dated 13.2.2007 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Fact Track Court No. 2, Lucknow in Sessions Trial No. 573 of 2000 Police Station Itaunja, District Lucknow whereby the present appellant along with one Suresh was tried for the offence under Sections 363, 376 (2) and 366 I.P.C. Accused Suresh died during pendency of the trial, hence case against him stood abated by means of order dated 9.3.2006. Appellant Chandra Pal was convicted and for the offence under Section 363 I.P.C. and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and also with a fine of Rs. 1,000/ - with default stipulation of one month rigorous imprisonment. For the offence under Section 376 (2) I.P.C., he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years and also with fine of Rs. 2,000/ - with default stipulation of two months rigorous imprisonment. Lastly for the offence under section 366 I.P.C., he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and also with fine of Rs. 1,000/ - with default stipulation of one month rigorous imprisonment.
(2.) IN brief the case of the prosecution may be summed up as under: - Complainant Desh Raj lodged an F.I.R. on 7.1.1992 alleging therein that his minor sister, aged about 15 years, has been enticed away by Suresh and present appellant Chandra Pal. They were busy in the search of the victim but she could not be traced out. Several persons have seen the victim going along with Suresh and Chandra Pal but nobody is ready to depose against them. After registration of the case, on 8.11.1992, the victim was recovered from Kumharwa Chauraha along with present appellant and Suresh. The victim was referred for her medical examination. In her medical examination, no mark of injury was found on her person or on her private part. Hymen was old torn and healed. Vagina admitted two fingers easily. No bleeding or discharge was present. Vaginal smear slides were prepared and sent for pathological tests, and the victim was referred for x -ray for determination of her age. On the basis of the aforesaid tests, no definite opinion regarding rape could be given. The victim was reported to be habitual to sexual intercourse and her age was reported to be between 18 -19 years. The Investigating Officer also inspected the place of occurrence on 7.11.1992 and after concluding the investigation, charge sheet was filed against both the accused persons.
(3.) XXX XXX XXX The case of the defence was that he has been falsely implicated in this case. It has also been suggested that Suresh had love affairs with the victim. She had gone out of her own freewill. The complainant was on inimical term because of such relationship, this false case has been concocted and the present appellant has been falsely implicated because he was close relative of accused Suresh.;