Nisha Gupta, J. - (1.) THIS jail appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 7.1.2005 whereby the present appellant has been convicted for the offence 376(2)(e) IPC and has been sentenced to 10 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 25,000/ - and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo one year's imprisonment. The contention of the present appellant is that he does not want to press his conviction. His submissions are regarding sentence only. The only contention of the present appellant is that he is only earning member in the family and he is behind bar since long, hence he should be released to the sentence already undergone by him.
(2.) PER contra, the contention of the learned Public Prosecutor is that there is no mitigating circumstance to have sympathy with the present appellant. Admittedly, he is maternal uncle of the prosecutrix. He committed rape on her. The prosecutrix has taken the present appellant on the pretext that her husband is ill and when the prosecutrix was going with him, on the way he committed rape on her and at the time of the incident, the prosecutrix was pregnant for 5 to 6 months. The appellant has placed reliance on State of Chhattisgarh v. Lekhram (2006 DNJ (SC) 418) where the prosecutrix was consenting party. Here the prosecutrix is not a consenting party. The appellant has also placed reliance on Lodkya v. State of Raj. (2007 (2) Cr. L.R. 1107) where number of contradictions were found in the statement of the prosecutrix but here nothing has been suggested so. Further reliance has been placed on Laxman Lal v. State of Raj. (2011(2) Cr. L.R. (Raj.) 890) where looking to the facts of the case, sentence has been reduced but here as pointed out earlier there is no mitigating circumstance to have any sympathy with the present appellant.
(3.) WITHOUT going into the merit of the case, looking at the above facts that the present petitioner is maternal uncle having trust with the prosecutrix, has committed rape on her specially when she was pregnant and hence the appellant deserves no sympathy. There is no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order and this appeal deserves to be dismissed and the same is hereby dismissed.;