Serial No. 01 Supplementary List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG Crl.A. No. 22 of 2025 Date of Decision: 20.03.2026 Shri. Chanky Shadap Son of (L) Krot Suna, Resident of Mukhla Village, Umsuwe, West Jaintia Hills District, Meghalaya.

…….. Appellant - Vs-

1. The State of Meghalaya through the Superintendent of Police, West Jaintia Hills District, Meghalaya.

2. The Office Incharge, Jowai Police Station, West Jaintia Hills District, Meghalaya.

……… Respondents Coram:

Hon’ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge Appearance:

For the Petitioner/Appellant(s) : Mr. S. Marpan, Adv.

For the Respondent(s) : Mr. N.D. Chullai, AAG with Mr. E.R. Chyne, GA.

i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No Law journals etc.:

ii) Whether approved for publication in press: Yes/No JUDGMENT AND ORDER

1. An incident concerning an act of rape perpetrated on the minor daughter of the complainant, wherein an FIR was filed on 29.07.2010, before the Officer In-charge, Jowai, Police Station, then Jaintia Hills District, has set into motion the prosecution case against the accused/appellant herein.

2. It is the case of the prosecution that the complainant in the said FIR had informed the Officer In-charge, that on 25.07.2010 at about 08:30 PM or so, when her said minor daughter aged about 14 years was returning from an evening Church service in their village, the accused/appellant had met her on her way and had pulled her into the jungle after which he had raped her.

3. Accordingly, the case was registered as Jowai P.S Case No. 125 (7) 2010 under Section 376 IPC, and a women Police Officer was tasked with the investigation of the case.

4. The said Investigating Officer (I/O) had immediately arrested the accused/appellant on 29.07.2010 at about 03:00 PM or so, and on the same day, he was sent for medical examination, which was done so at about 06:40 PM, the same being conducted by Dr. J. Buam.

5. The I/O had also recorded the initial statement of the complainant, the accused as well as the victim. The statement of the victim girl was also recorded by a First-Class Magistrate as required under Section 164 Cr.P.C.

On completion of the investigation, the I/O has found a prima facie case against the accused/appellant made out under Section 376 IPC and he was sent to face trial before the competent court of jurisdiction.

6. At the commencement of the trial, it is noticed that the Trial Court vide order dated 05.11.2013 has recorded that the charge under Section 376 IPC has been framed against the accused/appellant, the same on being read out and explained to the accused person, he declined to confess and claim to be tried. Thereafter, the prosecution has examined as many as five witnesses, including the complainant and the victim girl and has also exhibited the FIR, the Medical Report of the doctor, who has examined the victim girl and the statement of the victim girl made under Section 164 Cr.P.C. On the conclusion of recording of evidence, the court has then noted the statement of the accused person as provided under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

7. Thereafter, the argument of the respective parties was heard by the learned Trial Court, and on consideration of the same, including the relevant materials available on record, the impugned judgment dated 25.11.2021 was passed finding the accused/appellant guilty of committing rape on the victim on 25.07.2010, which offence is punishable under Section 376 IPC.

8. When the learned Trial court heard the parties on the issue of sentence, the learned Trial Court has reiterated that the accused/appellant was convicted for an offence punishable under Section 376 IPC, and upon weighing the mitigating and aggravating circumstances, has found it fit to impose a sentence of imprisonment of 7 years with fine of ₹ 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand), failing payment of fine, the convict shall undergo simple imprisonment for another 2 months.

9. Heard Mr. S. Marpan, learned counsel for the appellant, who has submitted that apart from the fact that the testimony of