x11-189/(Jai1) / / ////ll/////////////////I A c. J. P.’ R. 11/94/2900 wilEL APPEAL OF PR!SONER No b7$®f> % - m Name C‘ V... x Father s name Cirz {1111’} "dwhga Elgdrma d‘ W Q W¢< QYJIE-K) u&i A‘Y‘g Res1dence p x £ NG" $) Age D..@c\g} Sentenced to *% x? cm wamm'éy'zizm On W"& ‘> \9 £2 Under sectxonwbmu‘ @tg 29‘; QQQA.) byEqi‘gc iv} w’mh‘ mQywm {g QA'S) WU It 1s explamed to the pnsoner that 1f he states or w1shes to be repre ented by legal practitioner the Appellate (ourt W11] not proceed wuh the base for seven days unless the legal practmoaer appears If the legal practmoner does not appear wxthm seven days he may not heard at all lfthe pnsoner states that he does not w1sh to be repre- sented by legal practltroner the court may proceed at once w1th the case and wrll not be obhged to grve a hearlng to any legal practltloner who should appear Conflned m Jar! °\ ‘ &N%< the“ y % {La/l Dated .. 199a. at] we togather wlnch a copy of Judgement or order passed 1n the case or f our of trans- ;' 7x 1 mrsslon ¢1meal to,the WwoVaAtlQam proper Appellate Court. i 4M eram 32m =5 15 3%” Date of receipt in... office .. Date of receipt record to accompany the ..... r Memo ofAppeal to’ the Appellate court , \ No ,7 i . Date Huh Lam at “we. aha ..* JAB$LPUR Forwarded t‘o the ' . u ..l .........,.........-. .l..... -.. ... 2 5 JLttm» - Date of receipt m Appellate Court éw kegklo....nwugk( 6 “nu-n u-uu ---....«...‘....., . ‘ “who. A Fecept‘ Cler Forwarded to the C 1N3” “ego eenwnmw ms Jvmp r U} (PTO) ,l Date of Application for copy of Judgement 3,. 2 Date on which copyreceived \ t_ ‘l J 3 Date on whlch Appeal sent Q\§b L 4 Whether the prlsoner wrshes to be represented or net— Yes / No N “so {g L Name set 41W ‘WVJ dt «A lam XI—HC-78 3E!W, mug,W Wm§r:@ee:zya-H§z/z§i 2010 4 mW<W> [k XI—HC~78 WW,®W,%W mm a1 200 Wm(W) mwm wmm WW§WW mmmm fzA éiwm informed him +ha1' a'f abouf 8 0 p.rn. accused Scdim came +0 The hause and Took The prosecu‘rrix, aged ah UT 8 years, on fhe prefexf. Thn-I' he will provide her chocola‘re, since fhen he h s no1- refur'ned, an which he wenf in Search of his dqughfer'. He wen'r +0 fh house of accused, where he was residing. He saw +ha‘l‘ ‘i'he gafe of fhe quar er' was bohed from inside, he heard fhe cries of his daughi‘er coming from i side the quur+er, on which he broke open fhe dear by s‘iriking wifh fhe foo s and saw The? her daugh‘fer was lying an fhe ground in naked condi‘Hon and accused was commif’ring rape on her, on which he pulled The accused/appella “l. He saw iha‘l fhe blood was oozing ou‘l‘ of fhe Vaginal par‘l‘ of his daughfer. he neighbourers also saw Them. His daugh‘i’er disclosed him Tha‘l‘ offer opply oil fhe accused/appelloni‘ commi‘H‘ed rope on her. He had also bi'H‘en on h r breasf di cheek wi'ih fee‘i‘h‘ Receiving +his repori- +he police registered 1' e crime under Sec’l'ion 376 of The IPC. The prosecuTrix was s nT for‘medical examinaTion To The AssisTanT Surgeon, GovernmenT Medical spiTol, Bolod where Dr. SmT. Shashi Claudius (PW-7) examined The prosec Trix. During exominafion The docTor noTices seven laceruTed wounds in Th size of :1: cm x i- cm in semi circular fashion wiTh conTusion on The righT sid of cheek and in her opinion same were caused by biT$glitwiTh TeeTh. LaceraTe wound on The lefi' side of The cheek was found and There was same Type of biT en wound jusT above The righT breasT also. On furTher examinaTion of privaT parTs The docTor found ThaT secondary sex characTers were noT develop . Labia, mazora, menora medial side of Thigh having blood and no pubic hairswere present There was o laceraTed wound in The size of 1cm x 2cm x % fresh bleeding aT hymen exTending Towards \x P.T.O. e A AH ‘4 “ A A x m a... 0 i g o c , TW e XI-HC—78 o oooo... 3am, mug,W ..o.oo.. m 200 mm (W) mwm mmm mmwm F3r~ WW§WW‘ %aa%qsn%v vagina 41' 6’ clock posifion. Tuo sHdes of pos‘rerior fornix were prepared and same were sem- for chemicai dmalysis. érievous injuries i.e. Iacerafed wuunds inciuding perinea! muscles were caused by hard & blunf objecf mosf probably by penis wh‘hin 12 hours. Lace‘ra'l-ed wounds sfifched under local anesfhesia. Twb lacerafed weunds a‘l 2°& JIO” clock posifion exfending fowurcls vagina were found, injuries were simple in mosf probably by penis. Coi'fus na'iure and caused by hard and blun? objecl cervix vagina uferus was very small and age of prosecul‘rix is abouf 6-8 years. She is no'r habi+ual 1‘o infereourse and according ‘ro 'rhe doc’ror rape Inus been commi‘Hed on her. During invesl-igai'ion, fllle sample of lhe ground where lhe rape was commiffed was Taken under EXP-2. Si+e was also go'r photographed and K phofographs (Ex.P~3 d Ps4)’wene prepared by fhe pho'iographer. Blood sfained frock of 'i‘he prosecul‘rix was ll'aken inlo possession under Ex.P-5, underwear was faken in’ro possession under Ex.P—6. Sealed slides of vaginal parl' of ihe prosecu‘l'rix given by The docfor were +aken under EXP-7. Si'l'e plan (EXP—10) was prepared. Accused was aliso examined by 'l'he docfor aboui‘ fhe pofency and offer examinai’ion fhe doci‘or opined fhaf +he accused was fi-l' +0 perform i'he sexual intercourse and repor'i i‘o +ha'l' effeci‘ is Ex.P-12A. Recovered articles were senf for chemicd Raipur, from where repor+ (Ex slides, underwear and blood s‘ Mood and on fhe underwear o were found. \\ era l i examina'i'ion 1'0 Forensic Science Laborafory, .P—14) was received. Asper report +he frock, 'ained cemen‘l‘ were found +0. be sfained wifh f fhe accused semen and human spermafozoo P.T.0. XI—HC-78 WW,W,t‘ww .¢~¢..;.... . o @ :“Do mwféqfa: WWW mwmm WW9fw®F§R ~‘ %3q%w3n%$r FHT Affer complefion of iny accused/appellam‘ in 1-he Cout‘ Balod, whb in Turn commiffed " where learned 2nd AddH-ianal Transfer for +rinl. The prosecution in o occused/uppeilan‘r examined 1 accused/appellanf was recorced under Secfion 313 of Cr.P.C. in which he denied fhe ma‘l‘erial appearing in 'l'he prosecufion evidence againsf him and sfa‘red Thai he i§ innocenf andl has been falsely implica‘l'ed in fhe crime. Learned 2”d Addifional .f K respecfive counsel, convicted t men'l‘ioned in Para 1 of fhis juc We have heard Mr. R.K and Mr. U.N.5. Deo, Addifiona for fhe Sfafe. Mr. Jaiswal, learned co regarding involvemen‘r of The mainly based Towards fhe p riod of sen-fence. He submif‘red +ha1' fhe accused/appellanf is a bachelo ,he has fa look afl‘er his widow mofher and he has already served abou'r 11 ears & 5 mon'rhs sen-fence, Therefore, he be released on fhe senfenced alr ady undergone. On 'l'he oiher hand, Mr Bhafia, learned Panel Laywer for +he Sfa‘l‘e vehemenfly argued fhaf lookin To fhe nafure of crime,fhe accused/appellant l ‘esfigm‘ion, charge sheaf was filed againsf The "r of learned Judicia! MagisTrafe Firsf Class, ‘he case 1'0 learned Sessians Judge, burg, from Sessians Judge, Durg received the case on "der To es+ablish ’lhe charge agains’r fhe l wi+nesses. On The afher hand sfa‘l'ernen‘l' of :essions Judge, afier hearing fhe argumenfs of 1nd senfenced fhe accusedz’appellan't herein as gmenf. . Jaiswal, Advocafe for +he accusedi’appellanf Public Prosecufar wifh Mr. MP5. Bha‘ria, P.L. msel for fhe accused/appellanf did no'l' argue accused in crime in ques‘l‘ion. His argumen‘l‘ is P.T.O. Warm (W) ‘ XI-HC-78 HW,W,W M? Wmo.¢.q .o...... 00.00... In 200 WW (W) mwm wmm WW§WW mai%aan%31 4(1- §€a§1¥3n§$1 .7 Lu)“ dues no+ deserve any ieniency and appropriaha senfence has been imposed upon him. As far as fhe involveman'f of fhe accused/appellan'r in commission of crime under ‘Secfions 363, 3134 & 376 (2)(f) of 'I'he IPC is mncerned, fhe prosecufr'ix has been examinei as PW-5, who has s'fa1'ed “fha‘l' (1+ +he relevnn-r "time she was sfudying in Class 4W on fhe fa'reful dafe a‘f ubouf 7-8 p.m. accused came and asked her T (1+ he will provide her chocolme, *hereforeshe accompanied him. He fook her 1-0 a shop from where he purchased chocola‘ies and Thereaffer he said “fha‘i‘ le us go +0 his quar-i-er, as he wanfs 1'0 change his clofhes. The accused fook he in his quari'er in 1'he upper s+oried room where he asked Ramsingh 1'3 bring quor, who brough'r fhe iiquor. Both of fhem consumed iiquor and +herea er, Ram Singh iefi' 1-he house. The accused V bol'l'ed 1'he doors of 1‘he quarl' r from inside and undressed her, she was made +o lie on +he fioor, he s'i'arfed bea‘i'ing her and also s‘rarfed +0 bi-i'e her cheek wi+h +ee+h. Thereafter’ acc sed undressed himself, he slepf wi‘ih her and sfarfecl kissing her. On accou + of bi‘ie on cheek blood s'i'ar-l'ed oozing ou'r of her cheek. Accused i'ouched er vaginal par-i and +hereaf‘l‘er commii'fed rope on her] as a resulf of which blood sfarfed oozing ouf of her vaginal par'i. During +ha+ ’rime her fol-her ame, he opened The door ancl saw 1'he accused while commifl'ing rape. The above evidence of he prosecufrix has been corroboro‘l'ed by The evidence of PW-l-San‘i-ulal, fa her of prosecul‘rix, who has s+a+ed +ha1' after hearing from his wife he imme ia+ely left in search of his dough-fer and when ‘\r~\\ he reached +0 The quar'fer of ccusecl he found +ha‘r fhe door was bol'red from \. v P.T.0. T\ on \ i XI—HC—78 (a; WWW WWW mmmm ’é WW§WW §wf§mw fhe inside, he heard The chieel door and saw 1‘ha‘l' his daughfa The accusediwus Iying on her. was oozing ou1' from fhe privm The re‘porf (EXP—1) in fhe palh PW-4 Laxmi Bai, mofhor of prosecufrix, hos also corrobora’red +he m fhe fafeful day accused came To her house refexf fhaf he will provide her chocola’re. PW- e evening he saw +he accused faking The girl of d af‘fer some'rime Sanfulal came‘and inquired nformed Sanfulal fha'f accused has faken his daughfer fowards his house. He has furi‘her sfai-ed fha’f fhereaf‘l‘er police came, +he pha'rographer Took P—5. Ramkumar (PW-6) has sfa‘l'ed iha‘l‘ on fhe fa‘l'eful day he wem‘ 'l‘o fhe house of accused along wi‘ih liquor, af 1-ha1' Time, The prosecuTrix was siTTing in consumed liquor and ThereafT: nexT day The police called him c The accused under Ex.P-6. As far as The age of insTance, SanTulal (PW—1), faTl< Time of commission of crime hi herself has sTaTed aT The Time was aged abouT 9 years. More: of his daughfer, on which he broke open The r was lying in naked condi'rion on fhe floor and He pulled fhe accused. He saw fhaf fhe blood e par‘l' of his daughfer. Thereofl‘er, he lodged e sfa‘l‘ion‘ evidence of prosecufrix fha‘l i and fook her dough+er on 'lhep 3 Ramdeo has s+o+ed +ha1’ in 1+ Son'l'ulal fowords his house ar obouf his daughfer, +hen he i “the phofos and clo‘rhes of prosecufrix were faken info possession under Ex The house of accused. He along wiTh accused :r, The accused asked him To go away. On The ind They Took inTo possession The underwear of The prosecuTrix is concerned, in The firsT er of The prosecuTrix, has sTaTed ThaT aT The zr daughTer was 8 years old. .The prosecuTrix of examinaTion of before The CourT ThaT she ver, Dr. SmT. Shashi Claudio (PW—7’) has sTaTed P.T.O. XI—HC—78 EW,W,W @ m 200 ¢ WW(W) WWW wmm WWifmmA mmmw ..7r $w€§um 'HmT she examined fhe prosecu‘l‘r'ix and as per her opinion she was aged ubouf 7-8 years‘ Therefore, in viet‘b of fhis evidence if is esfablished 14m? fhe prosecu‘rrig was below 12 year‘s of age cf 1'he Time of commission of crime and was aged abou'r 7-8 years. ,‘ From fhe above evi‘Hence fhis fucf is esfubiished Thai fhe occused/appeiiqn‘f eni‘iced fhe prosecufr‘ix by saying +ho+ he wili provide her chocola‘l‘e, on which The prosecufrix accompanied him and he fook her 'i'o his house fhereby he commH d The crime of kianapping from lawful guardianship. From The docfor’s evi ence i‘r is also esfablished The? ‘rhere were laceraied wounds on +he ehe k & breasi’ of fhe prosecu‘fr'ix and same were caused by bi+e wi‘rh “the feefh fherefore’ fhe offence under Section 324 of .fhe IPC is also es-rablishecl. As far as The offenc. under 5ecTion 376 (2) (f) of The IPC is concerned, in The firsT insTa , The prosecuTrix herself has sTaTed ThaT The accused/appellanT offer remo 'ng her cloThes and his own cloThes, slepT wiTh her and he commiTTed rape on her, as a resulT of which blood sTarTed oozing ouT of her vagina. PW-l, faThe of The prosecuTrix namely SanTulal has sTaTed ThaT he reached on The spo‘l‘, h heard The cries of his daughTer in The quarTer of The accused, when he broke open The doors he saw ThaT accused was lying on her daughTer in a compromi ‘ng posiTion. He saw ThaT The blood was oozing ouT of The vagina of The prose uTrix. Above evidence of Th prosecuTrix and SanTulal (PW-1) sTands \ \corrobora‘red by The medical e idence of Dr. 5nd. Shashi Claudio (PWJ) who P.T.O. ' e n XI—HC—78 HW,WW,W WWO...‘ ..o...o..... O‘O‘ H1 200 WWW (W) WWW WWW WWW%f1‘—5’Q°rt%mgr{ MWWW V J? r é:a=t%wm1%w medically examined The prasecu‘rrix and sfa‘l'ed Thaf on examina‘rion of +he privafe par‘rsv of The prosecufvix she found a lacerafed wound in fhe 6° clock posi‘rion near hymen in 'l'he size of 1cm x 2 cmx % cm, blood was oozing ouf of 'rhe injury and Thai- was in +he vagina. There was a lacerufed wcund of perineai muscie, which was grievous in nm‘ure and could be caused by pene'ira'l'ion of penis. She has furiher s1'a1ed Thai“ af'l'er examina‘i‘ion, The wounds were s’ri‘i‘checl under local anesfhesia. She opined ‘ihaf fhe in+ercourse was commi‘r‘l'ed wi'ih +he prosecufrix. As per medical examinafion repor'l' EXP-14 on The frock, slides, which were "inken from fhe vagina of The prosecu‘rrix and on +he underwear of The accused, The bloods'i‘ains and human semen were found. Therefore, from fhe ocular evidence as well as from fhe circumsian'i‘ial evidence if is established beyond all doubi's Thaf 1'he prosecu'irix was subjec‘i‘ed +o rape by +he accu ed/appellan+ herein. In view of The foregoi g discussion, we are of The considered opinion fhaf There is no illegali'fy or in irmii‘y in fhe finding of fhe frial cour-I' fo fhe ex'lenf fhaf ‘i'he accused comm ‘H'ed "the crime punishable under Secfions 363, 324 & 376 (2) (f) of +he IPC, s fhe same is based on +he legal and clinching evidence and does no1' require ny in‘i‘erference by +his Court Now, coming +o 'i'he se fence par? of +he impugned judgment “the offence under Seal-ion 376 (2 (f) of fhe I.P.C is punishable no? less fhon 10 years bui- ii- may be exi'ended or life. The argumeni' of learned counsel for “rhe accused/appellant is fha‘i fhe accused/appellanf has a widow moi'her, There is nobody +0 look after h r and accused/appellan’r has already remained in defenfion for abou‘i 11 years & 5 mon‘ihs, Therefore, he be released on +he f P.T.O. XI—HC—78 mw,m,W . WW ..‘.‘ WW (W) d .o..oo§o m 200 WWW wmm swatwm hvq— WW§W®W ésmm Roshan sem‘ence already undergo}1e. same is'no'l- dispu'l‘ed by Iearn Under Section 376 (2) . +he minimum senfence is 10 y: for lifé. In fhe presenf case, defenfion for a period abou+ na'rur-e of crime as also +he cc considered opinion Thai" if 'l'he already undergone, 'Hmf wouk Therefare, while mainf under Secfion 376(2)(f) of T Sec+ions 324& 3‘63 of +he I.P. vaiiowed i‘o fhe exi-enf fha‘i insw (f) of fhe I.P.C., sentence is re 5 mon‘ihs. The accused/appel in any ofher case. L Cerfified copy as per ri. Sd/- ‘ I; L.c. BHADOO Judge As for as fhe period of defenfion is concerned; ad Panel Lawyer for The Sfo‘re. (f) of 'I'he I.P.C., as has been meni’ioned earlier, ars, which can be ex‘lendecl up +o imprisonmen‘r The accused/appellant has already remained in L1 years & 5 mon'fhs, Therefore, considering +he indi'l'ion of fhe accused/appellant we are of fhe accused/appellant is released on The sen‘fence i meef fhe ends of jus‘i‘ice. aining fhe convicfion of fhe accusedlappellanf 1e IPC and also The senTences imposed under 3., The appeal of The accused/appellanT is parTly 'ead of life imprisonmenT under SecTion 376 (2) duced To already undergone period i.e. 11 years anT‘ be seT aT liberTy farThnriTh, if noT required ES. Sd/- : Dhirendra Mishra" Judge > ’" P.T.O.