Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
SURESH KUMAR GUPTA, J.
Gautam - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 6093 of 2017
Decided On : 02-03-2021
IPC - Rape - Section 376 - Summary: The court confirmed the conviction of the appellant-accused under section 376 IPC but reduced the rigorous imprisonment of 10 years to the period already undergone by the appellant-accused in jail. The fine clause remained unaltered.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted under section 376 IPC for forcefully raping a 7-year-old girl. The victim's father lodged an FIR alleging that the appellant had taken her away and raped her near trees. The prosecution presented oral and documentary evidence, including medical reports and witness testimonies.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the appellant guilty of the offense under section 376 IPC based on the evidence presented by the prosecution. The court also considered the appellant's statement under section 313 Cr.P.C. where he claimed to be falsely implicated due to village enmity.
Issues: The main issue was the appellant's guilt under section 376 IPC, considering the evidence and the appellant's denial of the charges.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the nature of the offense, the evidence presented, and the appellant's denial of the charges in reaching its decision. The court also referred to legal principles related to sentencing and appropriate punishment.
Final Decision: The court partly allowed the appeal, confirming the appellant's conviction under section 376 IPC but reducing the rigorous imprisonment to the period already undergone by the appellant in jail, without altering the fine clause.
JUDGMENT :
1. This appeal has been preferred by appellant against the judgement and order dated 30.8.2017 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Court No. 2, Bulandshahar in Sessions Trial No. 704 of 2012 (State Vs. Gautam) in Case Crime No. 306 of 2012, under section 376 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Bulandshahar by which appellant was convicted under section 376 I.P.C. and awarded 10 years rigorous imprisonment and Rs.10,000/- fine in case default of payment of fine he will have to undergo additional imprisonment for three months.
2. As per version of first informant report, father of victim namely, Bhumesh, has lodged an F.I.R. against the appellant namely, Gautam, with allegation that on 25.5.2012 at about 2.30 p.m. when his daughter namely, Shivani, aged about 7 years, was playing near the hand-pump then at that time appellant has taken her away near trees of dates and forcefully raped her. When victim has screamed, brother of the first informant namely, Pappu, reached on the spot and saw the alleged incident. After seeing Pappu, appellant absconded from the place of occurrence.
3. On the basis of above submission, written report of the first informant, first information report was lodged on same day i.e. 25.5.2012 at 16.10 p.m. at police station Kotwali Dehat, Bulandshahar as Case Crime No. 306 of 2012 under section 376 I.P.C.
4. After lodging the F.I.R. under section 376 I.P.C., investigation of this case was entrusted to the investigating officer, Sanjay Kumar Pandey. During investigation, after recording the statement of Constable / Clerk, Investigating Officer has recorded statement of the first informant, Bhumesh, and victim, Shivani, and also entered into gist of medical examination of victim in Case Diary and on pointing out of witness, Pappu, prepared the site plan of the alleged incident. The investigating officer has arrested the appellant / accused on 26.5.2012 and after completing formalities of investigation, charge-sheet was filed on 6.6.2012 under section 376 I.P.C. before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahar where the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate has taken cognizance and case was committed to sessions court for trial as Sessions Trial No. 704 of 2012. This sessions trial case was transferred to learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 15 for trial. Charge was framed against the appellant on 14.9.2012 under section 376 I.P.C. After framing of charge, the same was read over to the appellant and appellant denied the charge levelled against him by the trial court and claim to be tried.
5. In order to prove its case, prosecution has examined seven witnesses:-
ii. PW-2 / Shivani is the victim of this case. For testing her competency, trial court asked some questions to her and after satisfying with the same, victim was examined before the court. She has stated in her statement that appellant has committed rape upon her and when she screamed, her uncle, Pappu, reached there and saw the alleged incident. Due to sexual assault blood was oozing out from internal part of her body.
iii. PW-3 / Dr. Hempratibha Sharma was examined before the court on 19.9.2015. She deposed that she has medically examined the victim on 25.5.2012 at 6.00 P.M. At the time of examination, victim, was fully conscious but there was no internal injury on any part of her body except bleeding which was continued from her private part. Hymen was torn and fresh blood was present and vaginal smear taken by doctor for confirmation of spermatozoa and she was being referred to the Chief Medical Officer for age determination. Due to internal bleeding, victim, was referred to medical college for further treatment. PW-3 has proved the medical report as Ex. Ka-2. On the basis of pathology report and X-ray report supplementary re
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
