Advocates:
['FROM JAIL', '', 'ASHOK KUMAR YADAV A C', 'A G A']

1

Court No. - 89

Case :- JAIL APPEAL No. - 355 of 2018

Appellant :- Dhani Ram

Respondent :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Appellant :- From Jail,Ashok Kumar Yadav A.C.

Counsel for Respondent :- A.G.A.

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

1.

Heard Sri Ashok Kumar Yadav, learned Amicus Curiae for the

appellant and Sri Vibhav Anand Singh, learned AGA for the State.

2.

Present Jail Appeal has been preferred by accused-appellant

Dhani Ram against the judgment and order dated 13.1.2017 passed by

Sri Pramod Kumar-1, Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.1,

Farrukhabad in Special Sessions Trial No. 8 of 2014 (State Vs. Dhani

Ram) relating to Case Crime No. 249 of 2013, Police Station-

Mohammadabad, District- Farrukhabad, whereby accused-appellant

was convicted and sentenced u/s 376 IPC to ten years rigorous

imprisonment with fine of Rs. 30,000/-. In default of payment of fine,

accused-appellant was directed to undergo further two months

rigorous imprisonment.

4.

The accused-appellant was also convicted u/s 354-Ka IPC and

sentenced to five years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.

5,000/-. In default of payment of fine, accused-appellant was directed

to undergo further one month simple imprisonment.

5.

He was also convicted for the offence u/s 5/6 of Protection of

Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and sentenced to ten years

rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 30,000/-. In default of

payment of fine, accused-appellant was directed to undergo further

two months simple imprisonment. All the sentences were to run

concurrently.

2

Prosecution Story

6.

As per the allegations contained in the FIR, the informant is a tailor

by profession and was busy in his work at his shop on the fateful day i.e.

10.7.2013. His wife had gone to see her relatives. His minor daughter

aged about 10 years was alone at home. The accused-appellant, who is the

uncle of the informant, had called the victim to his house on the pretext of

getting a jug. The accused-appellant closed the door, started disrobing the

victim and even outraged her modesty and fondled with her. On raising of

alarm by the victim, the passers-by namely, Deen Dayal and Mool Chand

saved her at about 4:00 PM. The victim did not inform about the incident

to the informant for two days owing to fever. After being told by the

victim, her father-informant lodged the FIR at Police Station-

Mohammadabad, District- Farrukhabad on 13.7.2013.

7.

The victim was medically examined on 16.7.2013 at about 11:30

AM and the examining Medical Officer observed “No fresh injury seen

over private part. …...” As per Serologist report, the age of the victim was

found to be about 12 years.

8.

The statement of the victim was recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C. on

16.7.2013, wherein she had corroborated the version of the FIR and had

stated that the appellant had disrobed her and outraged her modesty and

committed rape with her. The appellant is stated to have given her a

chocolate and five rupees to keep her mouth shut.

9.

Investigation was taken up by the Investigating Officer Rajendra

Singh, Sub-Inspector, who after recording the statement of the witnesses,

preparing site plan and collecting other evidences, filed charge-sheet

against the appellant on 13.7.2013 u/s 354-ka, 376 IPC and Sections 5/6

of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

Trial Proceedings

10.

The prosecution had examined the informant Ram Lakhan as PW-1,

who has supported the prosecution version as alleged in the FIR. No

3

material contradictions could be found in his cross-examination. He has

proved the written report as Ex.Ka-1.

11.

PW-2 Smt. Sandhya is the mother of the victim. She had not

supported the prosecution story and has resiled from her statement

recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. by the Investigating Officer. She was declared

hostile by the Public Prosecutor and cross-examined.

12.

PW-3 Deen Dayal and PW-4 Mool Chand are the independent

witnesses. They had