Surendra Vikram Singh Rathore, J. - (1.) THE instant criminal appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 27.1.2012 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 5 Raebareli in Sessions Trial No. 492 of 2009 arising out of case crime no. 105 of 2007, Police Station Deeh, District Raebareli, whereby appellant Rakesh Kumar Gupta was convicted for the offence under Sections 376 and 506 I.P.C. For the offence under Section 376 I.P.C. He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and also with fine of Rs. 2,000/ - with default stipulation of six months additional rigorous imprisonment. For of the offence under Section 506 I.P.C., he was sentenced to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment.
(2.) IN brief, the facts giving rise to the instant criminal appeal may be summarized as under: On 14.3.2007, complainant Smt. Ramau wife of late Chhote Lal lodged an F.I.R. at police station Salwan at 16:30 hours stating therein that her minor daughter aged about 13 years (hereinafter referred to as the victim) had gone to attend the call of nature about four months ago at 7:00 p.m. in the field of Bulla Gurjar. At that time, appellant Rakesh Kumar Gupta committed rape with her. The victim, because of the reputation of her family in the society, did not disclose this incident to anybody. She became pregnant by this act of the appellant, when her pregnancy was noticed, then she narrated the story to her mother. The F.I.R. was scribed by Anil Kumar Ojha and was filed at the police station. Thereafter the case was registered. The victim was referred for medical examination. In her medical examination, no mark of injury on abdomen or any private part of the body was found. There was no bleeding or tearing. Ultrasound of lower abdomen was advised to verify the pregnancy. She was referred for x -ray for determination of her age. After the aforesaid tests, the pregnancy of the victim was reported to be 25 weeks and two days old. This supplementary report was prepared on 22.3.2007. Ultrasound report was dated 17.3.2007 i.e. only after three days of filing of the F.I.R. No definite opinion regarding rape was given and radio -logical age of the victim was reported to be 15 years. Statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded on 17.5.2007. In her statement she has stated that on the date of occurrence in the noon she was sitting in a field then Ritesh reached there and committed rape with her, and also threatened her that in case she disclosed this incident to anyone, then she shall be killed. After completing the investigation, charge sheet was filed. The case of the defence was that he has been falsely implicated in this case. The victim was major and married. Even if any offence was committed then it was committed with her consent and she had attained the age of giving consent. He claimed himself to be innocent.
(3.) IN order to prove its case, the prosecution has examined, PW -1 complainant Smt. Ramau, PW -2 victim, PW -3 Dr. Syed Altaf Hussain, Radiologist who has prepared the ultrasound report of the victim. PW -4 Dr. Nirmala Sahu, who had medically examined the victim. PW -5 Dr. S.R. Singh, who had prepared x -ray report of the victim. PW -6 S.I. Jai Narayan Shukla, who has investigated the matter, this witness has also proved chik report and G.D. of the registration of the case as secondary evidence.;