NARENDRA KUMAR VYAS
Dinesh Deshmukh – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
NARENDRA KUMAR VYAS, J.
1. This Criminal Appeal under Section 374 (2) of CrPC has been filed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 16.08.2002 passed by Sixth Additional Sessions Judge, Durg in Sessions Trial No. 51 of 2002 by which the appellant has been convicted under Section 376 read with Section 511 IPC and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and six months with fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine 1 month rigorous imprisonment under Section 376 read with Section 511 of the IPC.
2. The necessary facts for disposal of the present appeal in short are that on 21.11.2001 at about 7.00 AM, the victim girl, who was aged about six years old at the relevant time was residing adjacent to the house of the appellant had gone to the house of the appellant for playing. Further case of the prosecution is that after returning from the house of the appellant, while crying the victim girl told her mother that her undergarment was wet and there was some spot in it. Subsequently, her mother asked her regarding wetness of her undergarment then she informed that present appellant has laid down her on the bed and forcibly rubbed
Koppula Venkat Rao vs. State of A.P. (2004) 3 SCC 602
Baldev Singh and others vs. State of Punjab (2011) 13 SCC 705
State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Mahendra alias Golu reported in 2022(12) SCC 442
Attempted rape under IPC Sections 376 and 511 established through credible victim testimony, despite lack of penetration.
Partial penetration is sufficient for a conviction of attempted rape, reaffirming the necessity of proven intent to commit the offence.
Insufficient evidence for conviction under IPC Section 376(1) necessitates conviction for attempted rape under Section 376/511 due to partial penetration.
(1) There is a visible distinction between ‘preparation’ and ‘attempt’ to commit an offence and it all depends on statutory edict coupled with nature of evidence produced in a case.(2) What constitut....
The distinction between 'attempt' and 'preparation' in criminal law leads to the conclusion that actions lacking overt intent to complete the crime cannot sustain a conviction for attempted rape, but....
The distinction between preparation and attempt in sexual offenses requires clear evidence of intent and action beyond mere preparation.
Pre-2013 IPC requires penile penetration for rape conviction; contusion with intact hymen and witness accounts establish only attempt under Section 511 read with 376 IPC.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the principle that corroboration is not required for the testimony of the victim in case of rape if the evidence is of sterling quality. The judgme....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.