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

1. The instant criminal appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 05.09.2009 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, court no.4, Saharanpur in Sessions Trial No.105 of 2008, whereby the appellant Mukhtayar Ahmad s/o Rafique Ahmad was found guilty of the offence punishable under Sections 376 and 506 I.P.C. and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence punishable under Section 376 I.P.C. and fine of Rs.5000/-. He was also sentenced one year R.I. under Section 506 I.P.C. In default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo R.I. for six months. Both the sentences shall run concurrently.

2. Heard Sri Swetashwa Agarwal, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Ram Yash Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that an F.I.R. was lodged against the accused Mukhtayar Ahmad stating therein that he had raped his own daughter. It is further stated in the F.I.R. that he had given divorce to his first wife 10 years ago and remarried with an other woman. After some time he brought his daughter/prosecutrix and son from the place of his first wife and both daughter and son of the accused started living with the appellant. The appellant had a bad character and when her daughter/victim was brought by him then she was minor girl aged about 7-8 years. After 4-5 years, the appellant started molestating her whenever he got chance to do so. In the F.I.R., it is stated that he committed rape upon her continuously for one and half years. When she told her brother Bilal about the incident, his brother Bilal had not reacted in any manner and kept silence. When she narrated the incident to her step mother, step mother told her that nothing was wrong in the behavior of the appellant. The incidents were narrated to her maternal uncle. Thereafter, an F.I.R. has been lodged by the prosecutrix. After lodging the F.I.R., the police started investigation against the accused person and after completing investigation a chargesheet has been submitted against the appellant before the court concerned. The court below framed the charges against the appellant and the case was committed for trial. The appellant submitted that he was falsely implicated in the said case in connivance with the maternal uncle and mother of the prosecutrix. He pleaded for trial. The prosecution in support of its case, examined four witnesses namely P.W.1 prosecutrix, P.W.2, Constable Anand Pal, P.W.3 Dr. Alka Dixit and P.W.4, S.I. Vinod Kumar. The accused person examined two witnesses in defence namely D.W.1, Akbar Alam and D.W.2 Salma, second wife of the appellant.

Analysis of witnesses

4. The F.I.R. was lodged by the prosecuterix, in which, it is stated that she was molested by her own father from age of eight years when she came back to the house of her father from the house of her maternal uncle. Her brother Bilal was also living with her father in the same house. She stated that when she became major and the appellant started raping her about from one and half years, when she opposed his act, he threatened to kill her and, therefore, due to fear, she could not say anything to the member of the family or to the mother and the maternal uncle. After some time, when the act was repeatedly done by the appellant then she told her brother Bilal about the incident but Bilal has not said anything. Thereafter she narrated the incident to her maternal uncle. An F.I.R. was lodged.

5. P.W.-1 prosecutrix stated in the testimony that she narrated the incident of rape on her to brother and maternal uncle. She supported the version of the F.I.R. and also proved her signature on the F.I.R. She deposed that she also told the incident to her step mother but her step mother has not taken seriously and nothing has been done on her part. In the cross examination the prosecutrix has stated that she had been raped for one and half year by the appellant