SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(All) 1855

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)

Advocates:
Counsel :
Sulabh Srivastava, Kirti Prakash Singh and Rajeev Kumar Mishra Rudra for the Appellant; A.G.A. for the Respondent.

Headnote:(Indian) Penal Code, 1860—Section 376—Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 313—(Indian) Evidence Act, 1872—Section 6—Rape—Conviction—Sustainability of—Victim aged about 7 years—Appellant allegedly convicted rape on victim—Trial Court convicted appellant for an offence punishable under Section 376, IPC—Victim immediately after incident apprised her mother-PW-4—Evidence of PW-4 admissible under Section 6 of Evidence Act on principle of res geste—PW-3-Victim and PW-4, also proved fact that bloodstains were apparent on her frock, even after it washed out by appellant—Evidence of PW-2-complainant, PW-3 and PW-4 found reliable and inspires confidence—Medical evidence also corroborated evidence of PW-2, PW-3 and PW-4—Interference with impugned conviction declined. Appeal Dismissed.

       

JUDGMENT :

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
















































































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top