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) 2286

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
BEFORE : SHRI NARAYAN SHUKLA AND CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, JJ.
ZUKKUR ALI ....Appellant
Versus
STATE ….Respondent
(Jail Appeal No. 2845 of 2011, decided on 19th December, 2017)

Advocates:
Counsel :
From Jail, Amarendra Pratap Singh and Subhendra Singh for the Appellant; A.G.A. for the Respondent.

Headnote:(Indian) Penal Code, 1860 – Section 376 – Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 – Section 3(2)(5) – Rape – Conviction – Statement of prosecutrix, if found to be worthy of credence and reliable, requires no corroboration – Court may convict accused on sole testimony of prosecutrix – It is not case of prosecution that rape was committed on prosecutrix since she was a member of a Scheduled Caste – In absence of offence to that effect S.C. and S.T. Act has no application – Conviction under S.C. and S.T. Act set aside – Conviction under Section 376 IPC maintained.

       Appeal Partly Allowed.

JUDGMENT :

(Delivered by Hon.Chandra Dhari Singh,J.)

1. Heard Sri Amrendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Nagendra Bahadur Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The present jail appeal has been filed by the appellant-Zukkur Ali against the judgment and order dated 24.11.2010 passed by the Special Judge, S.C.& S.T. Act, Basti in S.S.T. No.31 of 2010 whereby Special Judge, S.C. & S.T. Act after proceedings, convicted the accused/appellant for offence punishable under Section 376 I.P.C. and Section 3(2) 5 of the S.C.& S.T. Act for raping a minor girl of 14 years who belongs to Scheduled Caste. The accused/appellant was sentenced to imprisonment for life and also fine of Rs.50,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 376 I.P.C. and Section 3(2) 5 of the S.C. & S.T. Act. In default of payment of fine of Rs.50,000/- he shall undergo further one year simple imprisonment.

3. Brief facts of the case

I. According to the prosecution story, the appellant committed repeatedly rape upon the prosecutrix and whenever she opposed his act, he threatened to the prosecutrix to kill her, if she will tell anybody about the incident. Due to repeated rape, the prosecutrix became pregnant and after 5-6 months pregnancy, ladies of the family noticed her pregnancy and asked about the pregnancy. She narrated the whole incident and said that she was repeatedly raped by the appellant and due to that she became pregnant. On 6.10.2009, mother, brother and other people of the village went to the house of the appellant and asked about the incident, on the query, the appellant started abusing and quarreling with them and also threatened to kill all of them, if they shall lodge any complaint in the police station regarding the incident. The brother of the prosecutrix made a written complaint on 6.10.2009 at the police station Chhawani. On the report of the informant, a case was registered as Case Crime no.680 of 2009 against the appellant. The prosecutrix was medically examined by Doctor Neelam Singh, Medical Officer, New C.HC, District Sant Kabir Nagar. As per the medical report, the prosecutrix was pregnant of 5-6 months and hymen was torn but no semen was found. She further stated that no injury was found on private part. Doctor has proved the report Ext.Ka-3. The appellant was arrested on 7.10.2009 in the presence of the victim, who identified the accused-appellant. The accused-appellant has also confessed his guilt before the Investigating Officer.

II. The statement of the prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded on 22.10.2009. In her statement she stated that about 5-6 months ago, when she went to the field with her goats for grazing, at that time the appellant met there. He caught the prosecutrix and by applying force he committed rape with her. Whenever she tried to escape herself, he threatened to kill her. Due to fear she never disclosed the incident to any relative or any member of the family. Appellant had committed rape repeatedly 3-4 times and due to that she become pregnant. She further stated in the statement that she was raped 3-4 times in the interval of 4-5 days. When she became pregnant and pregnancy of 5-6 months, the member of the family noticed her pregnancy and then asked about the reason of the pregnancy. The accused was also sent for medical examination after arrest.

III. The accused was charged under Section 376 I.P.C. for committing rape. The appellant was also charged under Section 3(2) 5 of S.C.& S.T. Act for committing offence of rape upon the scheduled cast girl. The charges were denied by the appellant-accused and claimed for trial.

IV. The prosecution examined nine witnesses to prove charges against the accused-appellant namely P.W.1 prosecutrix, P.W.2 complainant-Santoshi, brother of the prosecutrix, P.W.3, Smt. Sunra Devi, mother of the prosecutrix, P.W.4, Dr.D.K.Srivastava, P.W.5, Dr.Neelam Singh, P.W.6,Smt.Sunita, sister-in-law of the prosecutrix, P.W.7,Radhey Shyam, Deputy S.P., P.












































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 Back to top