1

Court No. - 66

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1310 of 1986

Appellant :- Ram Singh

Respondent :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Appellant :- Jai Shankar Audichya

Counsel for Respondent :- A.G.A.

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

1.

The present appeal under Section 374 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the

appellant- Ram Singh against the judgement and order dated 21.04.1986

passed by the V Additional District & Sessions Judge, Farrukhabad in

Sessions Trial No. 175 of 1985 (State of U.P. vs. Ram Singh) convicting

and sentencing the appellant under Section 363 I.P.C. to 05 years rigorous

imprisonment, under Section 366 I.P.C. to 07 years rigorous imprisonment

and under Section 376 I.P.C. to 10 years rigorous imprisonment. The

sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.

2.

The name of the prosecutrix is not being disclosed and mentioned

in the present judgement in the light of directions of the Apex Court in

various judgements and Section 228 A of the Indian Penal Code. She is,

thus, referred to as ‘X’ in the judgement.

3.

The prosecution case as per an application dated 26.01.1985 given

by Vishram to the police of which Om Prakash Sharma is the scribe is that

on 18.01.1985 he had gone to Shahjahanpur and his sister / victim ‘X’

aged about 15 years and his mother were at home. On 21.01.1985 at about

2 p.m. Ram Singh son of Ajuddhi Kurami came to his house and enticed

away his sister by alluring her. They were seen by Jageshewar and Beche

Lal going away. When he came back his mother told him about it. He

searched her a lot but could not trace her. His report be lodged.

4.

On the basis of the said application, a first information report was

lodged on 26.01.1985 at about 11.30 a.m. against Ram Singh as Case

Crime No. 24 of 1985, under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C., Police Station

2

Tirwa, District Farrukhabad. The chik first information report is Exb: Ka-

2 to the records.

5.

The victim ‘X’ and the accused-appellant were apprehended on

01.02.1985 and a recovery memo was prepared. The same is Exb: Ka-5 to

the records.

6.

The victim ‘X’ was medically examined by Dr. Rukmini Jagtyani

on 01.02.1985 at 2.30 p.m. who was brought by constable police. On

physical examination the doctor noted as follows:-

“No marks of violence anywhere over body.

Breast well developed.

Pubic & axillary hair well developed.”

On local examination the doctor noted as follows:-

“Hymen torn, old healed tears present. No fresh tear, no bleeding pv at

present, vaginal admits two fingers easily.”

The opinion of the doctor was that she was referred for X-Ray

examination and the vaginal smear was sent for examination of

spermatozoa.

The said medical examination report is Exb: Ka-9 to the records.

7.

A supplementary report was prepared by the doctor on 04.02.1985

in which her final opinion was as follows:-

“1. Her age is about 17 years.

2. She is habituated to intercourse.”

The said report is Exb: Ka-10 to the records.

8.

The X-Ray examination of the victim ‘X’ was done of which a

report No. 73 dated 02.02.1985 was prepared by Dr. K.K. Jagtyani. The

same is Exb: Ka-11 to the records.

9.

The investigation concluded and a charge-sheet No. 27 dated

06.02.1985 was filed against the accused-appellant under Sections 363,

366 and 376 I.P.C. The same is Exb: Ka-8 to the records.

3

10.

Vide order dated 04.09.1985 passed by V Additional District &

Sessions Judge, Farrukhabad charge under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C.

was framed against the accused-appellant. He pleaded not guilty and

claimed to be tried.

11.

The prosecution in support of its case examined seven witness

being Vishram as P.W.-1, Smt. Jalsi as P.W.-2, Head Constable Sultan

Singh P.W.-3, the victim ‘X’ P.W.-4, S.I. J.N. Tiwari P.W.-5, Dr. Rukmini

Jagtyani P.W.-6 and Dr. K.K. Jagtyani P.W.-7.

12.

The accused in his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

stated of being falsely implicated in the present case because of some

money which was due on the first informant Vishram and on demanding

the sa