DILLU Vs. STATE OF M. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal has been filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C, preferred against the judgment dated 15.7.2015, passed by the 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge, Khargone in S.T.No.243/2013, wherein the appellants - Dillu @ Dilip amnd Kamal, have been convicted under Sections 363, 366A, 367(D) of IPC and under Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and sentenced as under :- <IMG>JUDGEMENT_343_LAWS(MPH)1_2020_1.jpg</IMG>

(2.) The prosecution story in short was that on 15.5.2013 at about 11.45 PM in the night the prosecutrix, a minor lodged a report against the appellants that while prosecutrix was sleeping outside her house, the appellants came and tried to muffle her voice by holding a handkerchief against her mouth, she shouted, but the appellants took her to a deserted spot and committed rape upon her. She had named 3 persons as the accused. The two present appellants and one another accused was later found to be juvenile. On the basis of the report, FIR was registered and the investigation was carried out and charge sheet was filed under the same provisions which the appellants were charged later on.

(3.) The trial court after recording the evidence, has found the appellants guilty and sentenced them as described earlier. In the appeal, it has been mentioned that there was no evidence available on record to form an opinion that the prosecutrix was a minor at the time of incident. The evidence of prosecutrix has also been termed to be unreliable and unnatural and that there was a huge delay in lodging of the FIR, that the prosecutrix was in fact, a consenting party and the impugned judgment has been sought to be set aside.