2025:BHC-NAG:4531 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.147 OF 2023 Shrikrushna @ Kisan Maroti Gaikwad, aged 21 years, occupation : labour, r/o Khairy (Yende), tahsil Arvi, district Wardha. ….. Appellant.

:: V E R S U S ::

State of Maharashtra, through Police Station Kharangana, tahsil Arvi, district Wardha.

(Crime No.231/2020). ….. Respondent.

Shri M.V.Rai, Counsel for the Appellant.

Mrs.S.S.Dhote, Additional Public Prosecutor for the Respondent/State.

CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.

CLOSED ON : 04/04/2025 PRONOUNCED ON : 29/04/2025 JUDGMENT

1. By this appeal, the appellant (accused) has challenged judgment and order dated 20.8.2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Wardha (learned Judge of the trial court) in Sessions Case No.55/2020.

2. By the said judgment impugned in the appeal, the accused is convicted for offences under Section 376, 376(2)(f), and 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay fine Rs.10,000/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 months.

3. Brief facts of the prosecution case emerged from the police papers and recorded evidence are as under:

The accused, cousin brother of victim, allegedly, committed sexual assault on her repeatedly on 9.1.2020, 12.1.2020, and 14.1.2020 which resulted into pregnancy and she delivered a child. On the basis of report, Kharangana Police registered the offence against the accused. On registration of the offence, the victim was referred for medical examination and it was found that she is carrying pregnancy of five months. The accused was also referred for medical examination. The spot panchanama was drawn. The samples of the victim and the accused are collected. After recording relevant statements, chargesheet is filed against the accused. During investigation, Chemical Analyzer’s and DNA Reports are also collected. As per the DNA Report, the victim and the accused are biological parents of the child delivered by the victim.

4. Learned Judge of the trial court framed charge vide Exh.18. In support of the prosecution case, the prosecution has examined in all 15 witnesses, as follows:

5. Besides the oral evidence, the prosecution placed reliance on CA Report Exh.13, DNA Report Exh.14, notice to pancha Exh.22, spot panchanama Exh.23, seizure memos Exhs.25 and 26, report Exh.41, FIR Exh.42, letter to Medical Officer Exh.46, medical certificate Exh.47, letter to Medical Officer Exh.51, identification form obtained for the purpose of DNA of newly born baby Exh.52, identification form of the accused Exh.55, identification form of victim Exh.56, letters to the CA Exhs.63, 67, letter to Medical Officer Exh.73, medical certificate of the accused Exh.74.

6. On the basis of the said oral as well as documentary evidence, the prosecution claimed that charges are proved against the accused. All the incriminating evidence is put to the accused to obtain his explanation by recording his statement under Section 313 of the CrPC. The defence of the accused is of total denial and of false implication.

7. After appreciating the evidence, learned Judge of the trial court held the accused guilty and sentenced him as the aforesaid.

8. Heard learned counsel Shri M.V.Rai for the accused and learned counsel Mrs.S.S.Dhote for the State.

9. Learned counsel for the accused submitted that relationship between the vi