1

A.F.R.

Court No. - 50

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 8196 of 2008

Appellant :- Jai Karan @ Pappu

Respondent :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Appellant :- S.N. Pandey,Amit Tripathi,Havaldar

Verma,Ram Ashrey Kashyap,Syed Wajid Ali

Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate

Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.

Hon'ble Ajai Tyagi,J.

(Per Hon'ble Ajai Tyagi, J.)

1.

By way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged the Judgment

and order dated 24.11.2008 passed by court of Special Judge, S.C. &

S.T Act/Additional Sessions Judge, Kanpur Dehat in Sessions Trial

No.269 of 2001, arising out of Case Crime No.216 of 2001, under

Sections 363/366/376 I.P.C., read with Section 3(1)(xi) of Scheduled

Casts and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989

(hereinafter referred to as, 'S.C./S.T. Act, 1989'), Police Station

Akbarpur, District Kanpur Dehat whereby the accused-appellant was

sentenced under Section 363 Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.) for three years’

rigorous impriosonment and with a fine of Rs.1000/-; under Section 366

I.P.C. with the sentence of five years’ rigorous imprisonment and fine of

Rs.1000/- and; under Section 376 I.P.C. with the sentence of rigorous

imprisonment for 10 years and a fine of Rs.2000/- and; under Section 3

(2) (v) of S.C. & S.T. Act with a sentence of life imprisonment and fine

of Rs.2000/- with a direction that all the sentences will run

simultaneously and in event of default of payment of fine, to undergo

two months’ further imprisonment.

2.

The brief facts as per prosecution case are that on 12.8.2001 at

about 8:00 p.m., the prosecutrix was kidnapped by appellant-Jai Karan

@ Pappu and two other unknown persons. Father of the prosecutrix

given the written information about the kidnapping to the near police

2

station. After two days on 14.8.2001 at about 10.00 a.m., the girl was

found by her father in the field of sorghum which is the farm of Shiv

Ram Shukla in an unconscious condition. After came to consciousness,

she disclosed the whole incident to her family members that accused-

appellant with two unknown persons committed gang rape with her by

gagged her mouth at gunpoint and went away extending threat that if

any report is lodged at the police station or this fact is divulged to

anyone, they will kill her whole faimly. When she along with her father

hiding themselves went to the police station for reporting the said

incident and after denied lodging the FIR, they sent a complaint report

to the Superintendent of Police, Kanpur Dehat then FIR was lodged on

15.8.2011 by the police.

3.

Police Station Incharge, Akbarpur, Kashmir Singh Yadav tookup

the investigation visited the spot, prepared site plan, recorded

statements of the prosecutrix and witnesses and after completing

investigation submitted charge sheet against the accused.

4.

The accused being charge sheeted for offence triable by court of

session. The learned Magistrate committed the case to the court of

session. The court of session summoned the accused who pleaded not

guilty to the charges framed and wanted to be tried.

5.

The prosecution so as to bring home the charges examined eight

witnesses, who are as under:-

1

Suryapal

P.W.1

2.

Prosecutirx

P.W.2

3.

Shiv Nath

P.W.3

4.

Dr. Narendra Kumar Jaiswal

P.W. 4

5.

Dr. Raj Rani

P.W. 5

6.

Kashmir Singh Yadav

P.W. 6

7.

Ramesh Chandra Pradhan

P.W.7

8.

Amar Singh

P.W.8

3

6.

In support of the ocular version of the witnesses, following

documents were produced and contents were proved by leading

evidence:

1

F.I.R.

Ext. Ka-6

2.

Written report

Ext. Ka-1

3.

Statement of Prosecutrix under

Section 164 Cr.P.C.

Ext. Ka-2

4.

Recovery memo of Blood &

Semen stained Cloth Chaddhi and

Salwar

Ext. Ka-9

5.

X-Ray Report

Ext. Ka-3

6.

Injury Report

Ext. Ka-4

7.

Supplementary report

Ext. Ka-5

8.

Charge Sheet Mool

Ext. Ka-14

9.

Site Plan with Index

Ext. Ka-13

7.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA for the

State and also peruse