Back
2019 Supreme(All) 1248
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
SUDHIR AGARWAL, UMESH KUMAR, JJ.
Rajesh Kumar Gupta - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 4723 of 2005
Decided On : 01-02-2019
For the Appellant : Manish Tiwary, Apul Misra, Ashwini Kumar Awasthi, Manju Thakur, S.P.Gangwar, Satyendra Kumar Mishra
For the Respondent: Sri Nikhil Chaturvedi, A.G.A.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliability of the victim's testimony, the sufficiency of slight penetration to prove sexual intercourse, and the gravity of the offense of rape, especially when committed against a minor girl.
Headnote:
RAPE - CRIMINAL LAW - IPC Section 376 - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed and referenced Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) which deals with the offense of rape. The court also referred to precedents such as State of Chhattisgarh Vs. Dehra and State of Punjab Vs. Ramdev Singh to highlight the legal provisions and their interpretations. The court emphasized that even slight penetration is sufficient to prove sexual intercourse and expressed grave concern for the victim's dignity and privacy. The court also held that the sole testimony of the victim is sufficient to record conviction.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the conviction of the accused-appellant under Section 376 of IPC for the rape of a minor girl. The victim's statement, supported by medical evidence, formed the basis of the prosecution's case. The accused denied the charge, claiming false implication due to a monetary dispute.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the victim's testimony to be reliable and corroborated by medical evidence and circumstances. It emphasized the heinous nature of the offense and dismissed the appeal, affirming the conviction and sentence of the accused-appellant.
Issues: The key issues included the reliability of the victim's testimony, the presence of corroborating evidence, and the severity of the offense.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the trustworthiness of the victim's testimony, the presence of corroborating circumstances, and the gravity of the offense, leading to the affirmation of the conviction and sentence.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction and sentence awarded to the accused-appellant were affirmed.
JUDGMENT :
UMESH KUMAR, J.
1. Present appeal is preferred against the judgment and order dated 23.09.2005 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No.4, Pilibhit in S.T. No. 448 of 2004 (State Vs. Rajesh Kumar Gupta) arising out of Case Crime No. 69 of 2004, under Section 376 of IPC, Police Station, Bisalpur District Pilibhit, by which learned Trial Judge has convicted and sentenced the accused-appellant under Section 376 of IPC for life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 10,000/-and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo two year rigorous imprisonment.
2. In brief, prosecution story is that on 24.02.2004, Km Meenu/ daughter of Budhsen Singh, minor girl aged about 11 years went to get labour charges from appellant-Rajesh Kumar Gupta at his residence and when she returned from there, she was drenched with blood, when informant and victim's mother asked about the incident, the victim narrated transgression of accused-appellant, who forcibly committed rape with her in the room constructed on the roof of his house. The victim tried to cry but the accused-appellant shut her mouth with his hand, due to which, she could not raise alarm. Hearing this from his daughter (victim), the informant, for lodging first information report, went to police station with her minor girl Meenu who was ensanguined. On the said written report of the informant-Budhsen, a First Information Report (Ex.Ka-7) was lodged at the police station as Case Crime No. 69 of 2004, under Section 376 of IPC and victim was sent for her medical examination. Her underwear and Shalwar were handed over to the police by informant-Budhsen. A recovery memo of the said clothes of the victim was prepared by the Investigating Officer and it was sealed in presence of Triveni Prasad, Fakirey Lal which is Ex.Ka.2. G.D. Entry of the said FIR was made by Head Constable Shyam Pal Singh which has been explained in GD Entry No. 33 on 25.2.2004 at 14.50 P.M., which is Ex.Ka.6. The medical examination of the victim was conducted by Dr. Surabhi P.W.3 who has proved medical report and supplementary report Ex.Ka-4 and Ex.Ka.5. The x-ray report and pathalogical report Ex.Ka-9 has been proved by Dr. Udaivir Singh P.W.7. Chick FIR-and GD entry No. 32 (Ex.Ka.7 & Ka.8) have been proved by P.W. Bhanwar Pal Singh. The Investigating Officer has prepared site plan Ex.Ka-10 and collected the report from Forensic Laboratory which is Ex.Ka.11.
3. The Investigating Officer, after completion of investigation has submitted charge sheet Ex.Ka-12, in the Court of A.C.J.M., Court No.1, Pilibhit, who took cognizance of the offence on 3.6.2004 under Section 376 I.P.C. The case being triable by Court of Sessions, was committed to the Court of Sessions on 5.7.2004 and it was registered as S.T. No. 448 of 2004. The case was transferred to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Pilibhit, who framed charge under Section 376 I.P.C. against the accused-appellant on 19.10.2004, which reads as under:
**eSa] t;ohj flag] vij l= U;k;k/kh'k]
ihyhHkhrA
vki vfHk;qDr jkts'k dqekj xqIrk dks fuEu izdkj vkjksfir djrk gwW
;g fd fnukad 24-2-04 dks le; djhc 3-00 cts fnu] ogn eksgYyk Xk;kliqj] vUrxZr Fkkuk chlyiqj] ftyk ihyhHkhr esa tc oknh cq}lsu dh ukckfyx iq=h ehuw mez djhc 11 o"kZ vkids edku ij vxjcRrh iSfdax dk iSlk ¼etnwjh½ ysus x;h Fkh rHkh vki ehuw dks Mjk /kedkdj vius edku dh Nr ij cus dejs esa ys x;s vkSj mlds lkFk tcjnLrh fcuk ethZ ds cykRdkj fd;kA bl izdkj vkius ,slk vijk/k fd;k tks Hkk-n-la-dh nQk 376 ds vUrxZr n.Muh; gSA tks bl U;k;ky; ds izlaKku esa gSA
,rn}kjk vknsf'kr fd;k tkrk gS fd vkids fo:} mDr vkjksi dk fopkj.k bl U;k;ky; }kjk fd;k tk,A**
“I, Jaiveer Singh, Additional Sessions Judge, Pilibhit, charge you, accused Rajesh Kumar Gupta, in the following way:-
That on 24.02.2004 at about 3:00 p.m. within the limits of Mohalla (locality) – Gayaspur, PS -Beesalpur, District – Pilibhit, when Meenu, aged around 11 years, minor daughter of the complainant, Buddhisen, had gone to your house to collect wages for packaging of i
