ORAL JUDGMENT: (per the Hon'ble Sri Justice D.S.R.Varma)

Heard Sri S.R. Sanku, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-accused as well as the learned Public Prosecutor, appearing for the respondent-State.

2. Appellant is the sole accused in the Sessions Case.

3. This Criminal Appeal, by the accused, under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is directed against the judgment, dated 15-09-2005, in Sessions Case No.326 of 2004, passed by the III Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Nizamabad, convicting the accused for the offence punishable under Section 376 (2) (f) of the Indian Penal Code (for brevity "I.P.C.) and sentencing him to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for six months.

4. The brief facts that are necessary for disposal of the appeal, as per the case of the prosecution, are as follows:

P.W.1 is the wife of the accused and P.W.3-the victim girl is their daughter. The family of the accused resides at Vattapally locality in Hyderabad City and they used to carryout business in the sale of artificial jewellary by putting stalls at the places of exhibitions, jataras etc. Apart from P.W.3, the accused and P.W.1 are also having another daughter and three sons and they are all minors. While so, in connection with their business, the accused, P.W.1 and P.W.3 along with the last son, aged about 1 1/2 years, went to Nizamabad in the month of May, 2003 and they were allotted stalls, bearing Nos.148 to 151 in Nizamabad Industrial and Agricultural Exhibition Society for carrying out their business. On 25-05-2003, at about 1-15 p.m., P.W.1 went to the neighbouring stall leaving P.W.3 in the stall asking her to take bath in the meanwhile. After a gap of 15 minutes, P.W.1 returned back to the stall and found that her husband-accused was indulging in sexual intercourse on her daughter P.W.3. Immediately, the accused got up and absconded from the stall. Then P.W.1 wound up the stalls after closure of the exhibition and came back to Hyderabad. P.W.1 informed the same to her brother-in-law, who was examined as P.W.2, and another, and at their instance on 31-05-2003 reported the matter to Falaknuma Police Station, Hyderabad, who recorded the statement of P.W.1 under Ex.P-1. Basing on the said report, a case in Crime No.115 of 2003 was registered and the matter was investigated into. After completion of all formalities, like subjecting P.W.3 to medical examination, sent Ex.P-8, the copy of F.I.R., to Nizamabad Town Police Station on the point of jurisdiction. Thereafter, the Nizamabad Town Police laid the charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable under Section 376 (2) (f) I.P.C.

5. When the charge is read over and explained to the accused, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. In order to bring home the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 8 and got marked Exs.P-1 to P-8. On behalf of the accused, D.W.1, who was working as Supervisor in Nizamabad Industrial and Agricultural Exhibition Society, was examined, and no documents were marked.

7. The Court below, after appreciating the evidence on record, both oral and documentary, available on record, found the accused guilty for the offence punishable under Section 376 (2) (f) and convicted and sentenced him as stated above. Aggrieved by the same, the accused has preferred the present Criminal Appeal.

8. Now, the point that arises for consideration, in this Criminal Appeal is -- as to whether the Court below has rightly appreciated the evidence on record before arriving at the conclusion that the accused has committed the offence punishable under Section 376 (2) (f) I.P.C.?

9. It is to be seen that the evidence of P.Ws.1, 3 and 4 is very much relevant for the purpose of the present case.

10. The evidence of P.W.1 is to the effect that the accused is her husband and the victim is her second daughter, who was aged about 9 years as on t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document