Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(MP) 2139
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
VIVEK AGARWAL, DEVNARAYAN MISHRA, JJ
Ravi Kol – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
CRA 2131/2015
,Advocate General
The court upheld the conviction for kidnapping and gang rape, emphasizing the corroboration of the victim's testimony and the common intention of the accused.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 363, 366, and 376(2)(g) - Criminal appeal against conviction for kidnapping and gang rape - Conviction upheld as evidence corroborated the prosecutrix's account, establishing the common intention of the accused - Delay in lodging FIR not fatal due to the nature of the crime - Conviction of both appellants confirmed. (Paras 1, 13, 17)
(B) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 374(2) - Scope of appeal - Appellate court must assess whether the trial court's decision is afflicted by any legal vice. (Paras 8, 18)
Facts of the case:
The prosecutrix, aged 16, was kidnapped and raped by the appellants after being incapacitated with a spray. The incident occurred on 29.05.2009, and the FIR was lodged on 04.06.2009.
Findings of Court:
The court found the prosecutrix's testimony credible and corroborated by medical evidence, confirming the occurrence of rape and the involvement of both appellants.
Issues: The main issues included the credibility of the prosecutrix's account, the implications of her age, and the nature of consent.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the evidence supported the prosecutrix's claims, and the delay in reporting was not detrimental to the prosecution's case.
Result: Appeal dismissed.
ORDER
Per: Justice Vivek Agarwal
This Criminal Appeal under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. has been filed by the appellants Ravi Kol S/o Buddhsen Kol and Arun Dwivedi S/o Rajendra Prasad Dwivedi being aggrieved of the judgment dated 07.08.2015 passed by learned 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Sidhi District Sidhi in Sessions Trial No. 293 of 2009 whereby, the learned 1st Addl. Sessions Judge convicted the appellants and sentenced as under:-
| Conviction | Imprisonment | Fine (if deposited details) | Imprisonment in lieu of Fine | |
| Under Section | Act | |||
| 363 | IPC | RI for 03 years each | Rs.1000/- each | RI for six months each |
| 366 | IPC | RI for 05 years each | Rs.1000/- each | RI for six months each |
| 376(2) (g) | IPC | RI for life each | Rs.10,000/- each | RI for one year |
(Substantive Sentences to run concurrently)
2. As per the prosecution story in short is that on 29.05.2009 prosecutrix who was aged about 16 years was travelling at about 03:30 p.m. from house of her maternal uncle to her own house when on the way at about 04:00 p.m. she met her neighbor Arun Dwivedi and Ravi Kaul who were travelling on a motorcycle. They asked the prosecutrix as to where she is going, then Ravi Kol took out a bottle of spray from his pant's pocket and sprayed it on her head and mouth, as a result of which she questioned, then Arun Dwivedi informed her that spray has been put on her, she started feeling dizziness and turned unconscious. When she gained consciousness, she was in a train compartment with 02-03 persons sitting in the compartment. Arun Dwivedi was sitting by her side. She ran towards the gate of the train then she found that on the platform board, Chopan station is mentioned, at that time, it was 05-06 in the morning. Her whole body, head and private parts were aching. Her undergarment was wet. When she asked Arun Dwivedi, as to where he is taking her, then he said that he is taking her for sale. When she informed the Police Personnel and the Train Ticket Conductor then Arun Dwivedi said that since she failed in 09th Class, therefore, she is being taken to her sister's place. Police Personnel scolded Arun Dwivedi as a result of which, when train stopped they got down.
3. At about 10:00 a.m. a train going towards Mudwas came, in which both of them set down. In the meanwhile, father of Arun called him, then Arun informed him that he kidnapped the prosecutrix and he is bringing her back. When the train reached at Bhadoura Station at about 02:00 p.m. then Rajendra Dwivedi boarded the train and asked Arun to jump from the rear side otherwise, father and uncle of the prosecutrix may kill him. Thereafter, when station came, she came to her house, narrated the incident to her mother, sister and others and informed them that when she was in an unconscious condition, her privacy was violated by Arun Dwivedi and Ravi Kol.
4. Report was lodged on 04.06.2009 at Police Station Majholi, registering Case Crime No. 168/2009 under Section 363, 366 & 376/34 of IPC, thereafter, prosecutrix was subjected to medical examination. Case was investigated, Charge-sheet was filed. Accused abjured their guilt. Trial was conducted and appellants have been sentenced.
5. Shri Vikesh Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the appellants submits that theory of spray is unnatural. It is submitted that, prosecutrix at the time of the incident was major, she had run away with Aurn Dwivedi. There was a land dispute between the father of prosecutrix and the family of Arun and therefore, they have been falsely implicated. In this regard, documents starting from Ex.D-5 to D-10 have been produced in support of this contention.
6. It is further submitted that, in any case, prosecutrix being major, it will be a consensual relationship and there is no evidence of Ravi Kol violating privacy of the victim. Therefore, it is submitted that for Arun Dwivedi, its a case of consent and for Ravi Kol, its a case of false implication, therefore, both the appellants deserve to be acquitted.
7. Shri Nitin Gupta, learned Public Prosecutor in his turn submits that, appella
