The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of direct evidence to prove the awareness of the victim's caste for conviction under section 3(2) (v) of the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

JUDGMENT :

1. The present criminal appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 29.06.2013 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court no. 2, Shahjahanpur in S.T. No. 705 of 1999 arising out of Case Crime No.21 of 1994 convicting and sentencing the appellant under section 376 I.P.C. to undergo ten years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/-, in case of default in payment of fine, the appellant to undergo further six months additional imprisonment; convicting and sentencing the appellant also under section 3 (2) (v) The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short S.C. S.T. Act) to undergo life imprisonment and fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default of payment of fine, the appellant to undergo further six months additional imprisonment; also convicting and sentencing the appellant under section 323 I.P.C to undergo six months imprisonment; convicting and sentencing also the appellant under Section 506 I.P.C. to undergo further three years of rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1000/-, in case of default in payment of fine, the appellant to undergo further three months additional imprisonment. All the sentences to run concurrently.

2. Prosecution story in brief is that the informant, Laxmi Devi (mother of the victim) lodged the first information report on 07.02.1994 at 18:15 pm. against the appellant alleging that informant is Jatav by caste. On 03.02.1994 at 5 p.m. when her daughter, (victim), aged about 14 years went to ease herself in toor (arhar dal) field of Pyarelal, the appellant Kamlesh @ Gabbar Singh of the same village arrived there; grabbed her daughter and committed rape upon her by stuffing cloth in her mouth. The informant followed her daughter in the field and rushed on the spot. The informant took her daughter out from the clutches of appellant. On her protest, the appellant assaulted the informant by fist and kick and butt of Tamancha and threatened her that if she made a complaint to anyone, the appellant would not leave her alive. On raising the alarm, Vijay Pal, mason and all the nearby villagers reached at the place of incident and saved her daughter. The husband of the informant was not at home. Moreover due to fear of the accused, she could not lodge the report in time.

3. On the basis of written information, F.I.R. was registered against the appellant as Case Crime No. 21 of 1994, under Sections 376, 323, 506 I.P.C. and 3(2) 5 S.C.S.T. Act. The investigating officer, after conducting investigation submitted charge sheet against the appellant.

4. To bring home the guilt of the appellant beyond the hilt, the prosecution has examined and produced as many as nine witnesses, namely, P.W. 1 Smt. Laxmi Devi (informant); P.W. 2 alleged (Victim); P.W. 3 Dr. Akash Srivastava; P.W. 4 Dr. Anil Sood; P.W. 5 Dr. Gayatri Dixit; P.W. 6 constable 110 Arjun Singh; P.W. 7 S.I. Iksha Ram Gangwar; P.W. 8 S.I. Rajan Lal Arya; P.W. 9 S.I. Prakash Narayan Yadav (Retd.). As a documentary evidence, prosecution produced written F.I.R. Ext. Ka-1, medical report Ext. Ka-2 to 6, Chik report Ext. Ka-7, Carbon Copy of G.D. Ext. Ka-8, memo of recovery of cloths Ext. Ka-9, site plan Ext. Ka-10 and charge sheet Ext. Ka-11.

5. Medical examination of Laxmi Devi, informant has been marked as Ext. Ka-2. Following injury was received by Laxmi Devi:

(i) An abrasion is present on right knee joint on upper part of Patella region size 2.5 cm x 1.0 cm in size.

(ii) A Traumatic swelling is present on left side back on lateral side on left arm.

(iii) complaint of pain left waist region.

Opinion: injuries are caused by sore hard blunt object.

6. Medical examination of appellant has been marked as Ext. Ka-3. Following injury was found on the body of appellant:

(i) Contusion 6 x 2 cm. Left side of leg. Complaint of pain and near gluteal region. No mark of any injury seen; no mark of injury over penis is seen; sample sent for sic of vaginal cell, if any.

(ii) Contusion 8 x 2 cm. Right forearm, ma