O.P. Bishnoi, J. - (1.) THIS is an appeal filed against the judgment dated 25.2.1984 by the learned Sessions Judge, Sikar whereby the accused appellant Phool Singh was found guilty Under Section 376 of the I.P.C. and was awarded 3 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2000/ - for the said offence. For non -payment of fine he was ordered to undergo six months rigorous "imprisonment. Rs. 1500/ - were ordered to be paid to the prosecutrix P.W. -4 Smt. Nathi after the amount of fine was deposited by the appellant.
(2.) THE facts of the case are few and can be stated briefly. On 4.4.1983 at 5.30 P.M. P.W. -5 Bhimaram (husband of the prosecutrix) went to police station Raghunathgarh and lodged a typed report Ex.P/6, according to which his wife Smt. Nathi was raped by the accused on 29.3.1983 at about 7 -8 PM in the jungle of village 'Jerthi' where she had gone to ease herself. According to the report certain persons were playing football nearby who came on the spot. P.W. -3 Durgadatt, Rajendra, Keshavdev and others came to the rescuse of the victim and got her freed from the accused. The report further stated that on 3.4.1983 the accused again entered the house of the complainant with a knife, upon which the sister -in -law and mother -in -law of the prosecutrix raised a hue and cry and the accused had to run away. P.W. -9 Richpal Singh and Hanut Singh were witnesses of the second incident. Bhimaram, as per the report used to live at Mumbai from where he reached his residence after receiving the telegram about the incident dated 29.3.1983 and was informed about two incidents and consequently the F.I.R. Ex.P.6 was lodged by him. A case Under Section 376 of the I.P.C. was registered and investigation was started. The challan was filed in the court of Additional Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Sikar who commited the case to the Sessions Judge, Sikar where the trial took place. After the trial the accused was found guilty and convicted in the aforesaid manner. Consequently, this appeal has been filed by the accused.
(3.) I have heard the learned Public Prosecutor for the State and the learned Counsel for the appellant and I find that it is difficult to agree with the conclusions drawn by the learned trial court and the appeal requires to be accepted.;