Point of Law: Sentence should not be either excessively harsh or ridiculously low. While determining the quantum of sentence, the court should bear in mind the ’principle of proportionality’. Sentence should be based on facts of a given case. Gravity of offence, manner of commission of crime, age and sex of accused should be taken into account.

JUDGMENT :

Kaushal Jayendra Thaker, J.

1. By way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged the Judgment and order dated 28.5.2005 passed by court of Sessions Judge, Bulandshahar in Sessions Trial No.106 of 2004, State Vs. Ved Prakash @ Danny @ Raju arising out of Case Crime No.74 of 2003, under Section 376 IPC, Police Station Narora, District Bulandshahar by which learned Trial Court was pleased to find appellant guilty of offence u/s 376(2)(f) IPC whereby the accused-appellant was convicted under Section 376 IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.10,000/-, and in case of default of payment of fine, to undergo further simple imprisonment for two years.

2. The brief facts as per prosecution case is that on 8.11.2003 at 8:15 am one Indresh Kumar resident of L.G.C. Colony, Narora, lodged a written report at Police Station Narora to the effect that on that day at about 5:00 am, he and his wife Smt. Babli were sleeping in their house and when they woke up, they found their daughter aged about 8 years not present on her cot. When they came out of the house then they heard the shrieks of their daughter from the side of the Lavatory, when they reached there, they saw that accused Danny, resident of village Sheikhpura, Police Station Chhatari, who used to loiter near Hamid crossing, had committed rape on their daughter and on seeing them, accused took to heels and ran away. The facts reveal that the daughter of the complainant was in precarious condition. She was brought to PHC Narora wherefrom she was referred to Bulandshahar. He came with his daughter to get her treated. On the basis of this Tehrir report of case crime no.74 of 2003 under Section 376 IPC was registered against the accused and its substance was entered in G.D. No.17 at 18:15 am. On 8.11.2003 the prosecutrix was examined by Dr. Sudha Sharma, Medical officer, K.M.C. Bulandshahar. She was brought by constable 1016-Bharat Singh. At the time of medical examination she was found to be fully conscious. Her height is 3 feet 10 inches, teeth 14 x 12, weight 20 Kg.

3. The prosecution so as to bring home the charges examined nine witnesses are as under:-

4. In support of the ocular version of the witnesses, following documents were produced and contents were proved by leading evidence:

5. Heard Sri Yogesh Srivastava, assisted by Sri Noor Mohammad, learned counsel for the appellant, Smt. Alpana Singh, learned AGA for the State and also perused the record.

6. Sri Noor Mohammad, learned counsel for appellant has submitted that he presses for clean acquittal of his client.

7. Deposition of the father of prosecutrix was recorded as PW-1 and in his oral testimony, he has identified to the accused. He has stated that the incident occurred on 8.11.2003 at 5:00 am in the morning. The prosecutrix at the time of incident was 8 years of age. In the morning, when he did not see his daughter, they went to search for his daughter. The accused was seen committing the offence and he ran away. His daughter was taken for medical treatment. He had called one Pankaj Sharma and gave the report at the concerned Police Station between 8:15 a.m. in the morning. The prosecutr