- (1.) This appeal by a convict is direct ed against the judgment and order dated 15-11-1983 passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Kheri in Sessions Trial No. 393 of 1983 whereby the appellant was convicted and sentenced under Section 376, I.P.C. to undergo five years' R.I.
(2.) The facts giving rise to this appeal may be briefly stated as follows :
(3.) The prosecutrix is a resident of village Pal hanapur within the circle of police station Bhira of district Kheri and so is the accused-appellant. It was on 28-1-1979 that the prosecutrix, Smt. Shanti had gone to ease herself in the cane-field of Munna at about 4 p.m. While she was coming back from the cane-field, the accused-appellant caught hold of her from behind and disabled her to raise an alarm by pressing his hand on her mouth. He also felled her on the ground and started committing rape on her. The prosecutrix could not wriggle out of the situation since the accused-appellant had over-powered her and she could not raise a hue and cry because her mouth had been shut. In the process of commission of rape, the hand of the accused-appellant which had been pressed on the mouth of the prosecutrix happened to slip away whereupon the prosecutrix raised an alarm which attracted to the scene of occurrence Puttu, Lalla and Vijay Prakash. The accused-appellant managed to escape on being detected by the aforesaid people. The prosecutrix also narrated her tale of woe to these people and came back to her house from where she went to the police station Bhira along with her father-in-law and Puttu to lodge the report about this occurrence. Accordingly the prosecutrix, Smt. Shanti lodged orally a report about this occurrence at police station Bhira on the same day i.e. 28-1-1979 at 8.05 p.m. In this report, she named the accused- appellant as the culprit who had committed rape on her against her will. Investigation followed. The prosecutrix was examined the next day at about 1.30 p.m. by Dr. Radha Vats P.W. 3. Since the prosecutrix was a married lady, no opinion about the rape could be given by the said doctor. After completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet for the prosecution of the accused-appellant under Section 376, I.P.C. was submitted by the Investigating Officer. The accused was put on trial on a charge u/S. 376, I.P.C. He pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed his false implication at the hands of one Hanif who according to him, was seen coming out of the cane-field together with the prosecutrix but in order to save himself, he got the report lodged against the accused-appellant.;