1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. O R D E R State of Rajasthan vs. Ghanshyam & Ors. S.B. Criminal Leave to Appeal No.39/2009 under Section 378(i)& (iii) Cr.P.C. against the judgment dated 30.11.2007 passed by Shri Prashant Kumar Agarwal, RHJS, Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Jhalawar in sessions case no.30/2007. Date of Order ::::: February 27,2009 Present HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE BHANWAROO KHAN Mrs. Rekha Madnani, P.P. The relevant facts in brief are that on 28.1.2007 the prosecutrix lodged a report at the police station Sunel with the averments that on 23.1.2007 when she was going to deliver food to her mother who was working as a labourer at the pond of the village in between accused Guddu Singh forcibly took her to the field and committed rape. The police after investigation filed challan against accused respondent for offence under Section 341 and 376 IPC and the 2 trial proceeded. On the basis of the material and evidence collected by the prosecution the learned trial court framed charge against the accused respondent under Section 376 IPC, who denied the same, pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. In support of its case, the prosecution examined nine witnesses and documents from Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.40 were got examined. In his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. the accused respondent denied the allegations appeared against him on the basis of the evidence tendered by the prosecution. However, no defence was led. The trial court after conclusion of the trial and taking into consideration the delay in lodging of the FIR and the contradictions available in the statements of the prosecution witnesses acquitted the accused respondent of the charge under Section 376 IPC vide judgment dated 30.11.2007. Hence, this leave to appeal. Heard learned P.P. and perused the impugned judgment as well as the material and evidence available on the record of the case. The statement of the prosecutrix along with the statement of her mother and also the recovered broken bangle pieces from the place of occurrence reveal that prima facie the accused respondent was responsible for the offence 3 charged. Simply on the basis of delay in lodging of the FIR for which explanation is coming forward satisfactorily explains the delay in lodging of the FIR. The trial court on the basis of the delay in lodging of the FIR has presumed that no satisfactory explanation has been given, which is contrary to the facts and evidence available on record. The contradictions pointed out by the trial court are also not so material which can lead to an inference that the story of the prosecutrix is totally false. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where leave to appeal should be granted. Consequently, leave to appeal is granted. The memo of leave to appeal be treated as memo of appeal. Appeal be registered and the accused respondent be summoned through bailable warrant in the sum of Rs.30,000/-. (Bhanwaroo Khan),J. bairwa