Honble BANSAL, J.–This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 30.11.2000 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases and Additional Sessions Judge, Alwar whereby accused appellant Vishram has been convicted under Sections 376 and 392 IPC and sentenced to suffer R.I. for seven years and a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further suffer R.I. for six months and R.I. for three years and a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to further suffer R.I. for three months respectively. Both the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. However, the accused-appellant has been acquitted of the charge under Section 3(2) (v) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

(2). Briefly stated the facts of the prosecution case are that on 3.10.99 `Parcha-Bayan Ex.P3 of Smt. Ramu Devi (PW2) was recorded by the SHO, P.S. Rajgarh, District Alwar in Zanana Hospital, Rajgarh wherein it was stated by her that yesterday at about 5.00 p.m. she was going from her in-laws village Sehra to her fathers village Luharwala. When she covered some distance from Swami Dayal bus stand she was dragged to a nearby field by accused Vishram and he forcibly committed sexual intercourse with her. Having satisfied his lust, accused Vishram inserted three fingers into her vagina which resulted in tearing of vagina and profuse bleeding. She made hue and cry. Hearing her outcry, daughter of Harlya Bairwa, R/o Kali Pahadi came there. On seeing her, accused Vishram snatched her golden ornaments namely Kundal, Khangwali, Jantar and silver ornaments namely Mangalsutra, Chain, Kanakati, Saanth, Paijeb and fled away. From the place of occurrence she was taken to village Luharwala on motor-cycle by a person who had also reached there. From village Luharwala she was brought to Rajgarh hospital by her mother, Uncle Hajari and Aunt Dhanki. It was also stated by Smt. Ramu Devi that on inquiry she came to know the name of the culprit who had committed rape on her. On the basis of `Parcha-Bayan Ex.P3, SHO, P.S. Rajgarh registered the F.I.R. and investigated the case. On completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the accused- appellant in the Court Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajgarh who committed the case to the Court of learned Special Judge.

(3). The learned Special Judge framed charges under Sections 376 and 392 IPC and under Section 3(ii) (v) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the appellant who pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. To prove the aforesaid charges the prosecution examined as many as 16 witnesses. In his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the accused-appellant pleaded innocence and stated that on account of enmity with Chhotelal Meena, he was falsely implicated in this case. In defence two witnesses were examined.

(4). The learned trial Judge, on hearing the final submissions made by both the parties, convicted and sentenced the accused- appellant as indicated here-in-above.

(5). I have heard learned counsel for the accused-appellant, learned Public Prosecutor for the State and with their assistance, carefully scanned and scrutinized the material on record.

(6). Learned counsel for the accused-appellant submitted that there was unexplained delay of 23 hours in reporting the matter to the police. The accused-appellant was not known to the prosecutrix before the alleged incident and no test identification parade was held. Additionally there was no corroboration to the evidence of the prosecutrix. Medical evidence does not lend any assurance to her testimony. Learned counsel has also placed reliance on Abid and Ors. vs. State of Rajasthan, 1998 Jan. R.C.C. 66. In the aforesaid background it was submitted that the conviction, as recorded, is not proper.

Learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State has supported the impugned judgment.

(7). In Aman Kumar & Another vs. State of Haryana, (2004) 4 SCC 379, the Apex Court has observed

Click Here to Read the rest of this document