ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
VIRENDRA KUMAR-II, J.
VISHWA NATH @ PUJARI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U.P. – Respondent
(Criminal Appeal No. 561 of 1998, decided on 20th December, 2017)
Hon'ble Virendra Kumar-II,J.
1. Heard Mr. Kirti Prakash Singh, learned amicus curiae for the appellant and Mr. Masood Ali 'Mashu', learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. This appeal has been preferred assailing impugned judgment and order dated 27.8.1998 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-V Gonda in Sessions Trial No. 422 of 1997. The appellant has been convicted vide impugned judgment and order for offence punishable under Section 376 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment.
3. It is pleaded in grounds of appeal that trial court has ignored the material evidence and facts available on face of record. It has not applied its judicious mind and totally failed to appreciate evidence of PW-1, PW-2, PW-3 and PW-4 in correct perspective. It has further pleaded that impugned judgment and order under challenge is absolutely contrary to the fundamental principles of natural justice and it is perverse in law and facts both. It has been mentioned in grounds of appeal that no independent witness was examined on behalf of prosecution to support the evidence of interested witnesses. The prosecution story does not accord with any probabilities and it is tainted. It is contended that eyewitness, namely, Ram Kripal has turned hostile and another eyewitness Jag Prasad has not been produced by the prosecution during course of trial. The trial court has not analysed and appreciated injury report of the prosecutrix properly. Likewise, medical examination of the appellant was not conducted by any doctor to assess that at the time of incident, the appellant was matured for intercourse or not. The scribe of F.I.R. was not examined before the trial court.
4. On the basis of these grounds, the impugned judgment and order has been assailed and it has prayed that it be set aside.
5. During pendency of this appeal, appellant moved application under Section 7-A of Juvenile Justice Care and Protection Act, 2000. This Court vide order dated 14.11.2013 allowed this application and directed the Juvenile Justice Board to determine the age of the appellant on the date of incident. The District Judge, Gonda has informed vide letter dated 23.7.2016 that appellant was aged 21 years 2 months and 20 days on the date of incident and he was not juvenile as claimed by him and provided order dated 6.7.2016 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Gonda.
6. I have perused record of sessions trial no. 422 of 1997 (State Versus Vishwanath alias Pujari) arising out of Case Crime No. 158 of 1997 under Section 376 I.P.C., Police Station Kudiya, District Gonda.
7. Complainant Ram Rang submitted a written report Ex. Ka-2 on 26.9.1997 before the S.H.O. of Police Station Kudiya, District Gonda. On the basis of this written report, Crime No. 158 of 1997 under Section 376 I.P.C. was registered on 26.9.1997 at 17:25 hours vide check F.I.R. Ex. Ka-3, G.D. Ex. Ka-4 of registration of this crime was also prepared.
8. As per facts narrated in written report, complainant informed that on 26.9.1997 at about 3:00 p.m. his daughter aged 6 years was playing. Appellant Vishwanath alias Pujari lured her on pretext of giving "bali of maize". He brought her in his "Madha/Charani" and committed rape with her. The victim raised alarm, witnesses Jag Prasad and Ram Kripal reached at place of occurrence, then accused fled away leaving the victim.
9. During course of investigation, Investigating Officer prepared recovery memo Ex. Ka-5 for taking into possession frock of the victim. He also inspected the place of occurrence and prepared site plan Ex. 6-A. The victim was medically examined by the concerned doctors, who prepared medical examination report Ex. Ka-1 and age determination report Ex. Ka-6. The age of the victim was opined seven years on the date of her medical examination on 27.9.1997, when she was medically examined by the doctor.
10. After conclusion of investigation, charge sheet Ex. Ka-7 was submitted by the Investigating Officer.
11. After committal of this case on 1
Allarakha K. Mansuri v. State of Gujarat
Bhagaloo Lodh v. State of U.P.
Bhagwan Singh and others Vs. State of M.P.
Dalip Singh v. State of Punjab
Darya Singh v. State of Punjab
Dattu Ramrao Sakhare v. State of Maharashtra
Gangabhavani v. Rayapati Venkat Reddy
Gentela Vijayavardhan Rao v. State of A.P.
Golla Yelugu Govindu v. State of A.P.. (2008) 16 SCC 769
Govindaraju Vs. State of Karnataka. (2009) 14 SCC 236
Hari Obula Reddy v. State of A.P.
Kartik Malhar v. State of Bihar
Piara Singh v. State of Punjab
Raghubir Singh v. State of U.P.
State of Maharashtra Vs. Bharat Fakira Dhiwar
State of Punjab Vs. Hakim Singh
State of U.P. Versus Krishna Master
Sukhwinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab
Ramashish Rai v. Jagdish Singh
Ratansinh Dalsukhbhai Nayak v. State of Gujarat
Shiv Ram and anr. vs. State of U.P.
State of Haryana V. Prem Chand and others
Suryanarayana v. State of Karnataka
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.