Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2001 DIGILAW 582 (MP)

Bahadursingh v. State of M. P.

2001-08-08

N.K.JAIN

body2001
JUDGMENT This appeal under section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, 'the Code') is directed against the judgment dated 10.1.1991 passed by IV Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain in S.T. No. 73/89, convicting the accused/appellant Bahadursingh under section 376 and 506 of the IPC and sentencing him to 7 years RI with fine of Rs. 2,000/for the former and six months RI for the latter. The case of the prosecution in the trial Court was that on 23.9.1988, girl Savita, aged about 9 years, together with her sister Gattabai had gone to the nearby fields of village Masvadiya for grazing goats" when around 3'O clock in the afternoon, accused Bahadursing took her to a nearby field of Juvar and committed rape on her. He also threatened the prosecutrix with dire consequences, if she told anyone about the incident. The prosecutrix immediately related the incident to her brother Shankar and then to her parents. A report of the incident was lodged by Soma, the father of the prosecutrix, on 25.9.1988 at PS Ingoriya on the basis on which a case was registered and after due investigation the accused was charge-sheeted for trial which ended into his conviction and sentence as aforesaid. I have heard Shri B.A. Nigam, LC for appellant and Shri M. Upadhyaya, learned PP for respondent-State. . It has not been disputed either before the trial Court or before this Court that prosecutrix girl Savita, on the date of incident, was much below the age of 16 years. Infact, she was about 9 years old as noted by the trial Court in her deposition and borne out fully from the ossification test report Ex. P-5 proved by Dr. S.P. Khare PW-8. The only question, therefore, remains for determination is whether she was subjected to sexual intercourse by the appellant a grown-up youth aged about 19 years (vide ossification test report Ex. P-8). Savita PW 3, who after her initial examination was administered oath by the Court, has testified that she was carried away by the accused in a Juwar field where she was raped by the accused. Shankar PW-4 has deposed that on being called by Gattabai when he reached the spot he saw Savitabai lying in the field and the accused was seen fleeing from the scene of occurrence. Shankar PW-4 has deposed that on being called by Gattabai when he reached the spot he saw Savitabai lying in the field and the accused was seen fleeing from the scene of occurrence. He further deposed that Savita was bleeding of her private part and she told him that accused Bahadursingh has committed forcible sexual intercourse with her. Soma PW -1, the father of the prosecutrix, has testified that Shankar had brought her daughter home that she was bleeding of her private part and she told that the accused Bahadursingh has committed sexual· intercourse with her. Testimony of the aforesaid witnesses could not be challenged successfully by the defence in their cross-examination. The prosecutrix an innocent girl aged only about 9 years has given very natural version of the entire incident. She is corroborated fully by the evidence of Shankar and Soma. Further important corroboration is found in the medical evidence of Dr. Madhu Nagar, who had examined the prosecutrix on 25.9.1988 and found that her hymen was ruptured and there was infected injury on her private part which bleeded on being touched. Although initially this Dr. Madhu Nagar in her report Ex. P-3 gave no definite opinion as to the commission of rape but on subsequent query she opined that the injury found on the private part of the prosecutrix could be the result of commission of rape on her. The medical evidence was thus positive as to the commission of forcible sexual intercourse on the prosecutrix girl. Slides of vaginal swab of the prosecutrix were prepared and her Petticoat was also taken of, sealed and sent for chemical examination. A Chaddi was also taken from the person of the accused sealed and sent to FSL Sagar. Chemical examination report Ex. P-18 has confirmed presence of semen and human Spermatozoa on all these articles. This again confirmed commission of rape by the accused on the prosecutrix girl. It was, however, contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that FIR was delayed by two days which created doubt in the prosecution story. It is true that FIR Ex. P-l was lodged by Soma on 25.9.1988 i.e. after two days of the occurrence. This again confirmed commission of rape by the accused on the prosecutrix girl. It was, however, contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that FIR was delayed by two days which created doubt in the prosecution story. It is true that FIR Ex. P-l was lodged by Soma on 25.9.1988 i.e. after two days of the occurrence. However, this delay stands reasonable explained by Soma when he stated that as the honour of the family was involved, he wanted to consult his relatives before deciding whether to take the matter to the police or not. It is not uncommon that such consideration delays action on the part of near relation of an young girl who is raped (see: Harpalsingh ( AIR 1981 SC 361 ). The delay in the instant case is not fatal to the prosecution case which is established fully by the other evidence on record. From the foregoing discussion it, therefore, inevitably follows that the charges under section 376 and 506 IPC were brought on fully to the accused-appellant. Minimum sentence of 7 years RI has been awarded against the appellant and no interference is, therefore, called for on this count too. Resultantly, this appeal fails and is dismissed. The appellant be made to suffer the sentence remaining, if any, subject to the provision of section 428 of the Code.