IN THE HIGH COURT OF^JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH CRIMINAL APPEAL N0. / ^/ ? /2003 APPELLANT IN JAIL ^-...-•" ^.-—"'" G»W ^"•' RESBONDENT Ramchandra Kalar S/o Bhagwali Kalar Caste- Kalar (Sinha), Aged about 21 years , R/o. Sahaspur, P.S. Dhamdha, Distt. Durg (C.G.) VERSUS The State of Chhattisgarh Through-P.S. Dhamdha, Distt. Durg (C.G.) S.T. No. 74/2000 ^ Offence U/s. 376 ofI.P.C. ^ CRIMINAL APPEAL UNDER SECTION 37r4 (21 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ^s^ HI6H COURT OF CHHATTIS6ARH AT BILASPUR Singte Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice DitJp Raosaheb Deshmukh Criminal ApDeal No. 1211/2003 ftamchandra Katar Vs. State of Chhattisgarh 5hr»ft. K. Ja<n, counsei for the appffcant. Shri U.K.S.Chancte(P.L. for the State JUD6MENT (Oelivered on 10th ckxy of March 2006) This appeal is directed against the judgment dart-ed 11.7.2000 delivered by Shri ^.Minhajuddin, learned 1st Additionat Sessions Judge in sessions cose No.74/2000 whereby the appelldnt was convicted under Section-376 I.P.C. and wos sentenced t6 undergo RJ. for 7 years and a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to undergo additionoj R.I. for six months. 2. Briefly stated the prosecution story is that on 16.1.2000 at about 2.30 P.AA. the prosecutrix, a girl below 12 yeors of oige was retuming home from the agricuttural field. The appetlont cought hold of the prosecutrix and lifting her took her to a neorby field ond committed rdpe on her. The prosecutrix att-empted to shout, but the appellant gagged her mouth and threatened her. After committing rape, the cippellant ron away. Due to heavy bleeding from the vaginal orifice, her chaddli, skirt' and frock got stained with blood. The prosecutrix came home -^' ,<' crying ond ncrrart'ed the incident to her parents. FJ.R. Ex.P.l wois (odged by the prosecutrix at Police Stotion bhamdha situated ort- a distoince of 12 kilometers, on the SGane day ort- 6.00 P.M. 3. Dr. Smt. S. Rajput P.W.6 vide Ex.P.ll examined the prosecutrix ond found per vaginal examinotion that she was bleeding profusely. Blood clots were present inside the vagina in (orge quGntity. Vaginoil tear wos also present about 4 cm. in (ength on the loteral wall ext-ending up to the post-vaginal walt which wos bteeding profusety. A tear wos also found on the forchetl'e about l cm. in length skin deep with fresh bleedin9. It wous opined that the injuries aforesaid could be due to forcefut sexual intercourse, She also examined one cotton skirt and one cotton underwear of the prosecutrix sent by P.S. Dhomdha ound found blood like stains on both aund advised chemical anatysis for confirmotion of the nature of the stains. The appellcmt was examined by br.P.b. Chandrawcinshi P.W.9 and foundvide Ex.P.14 thot the appellount was c<xpoA)le of performin9 sexual intercourse. The c/«K/<//IArticleA-l', skirt 'Art-icle A-2* of the prosecutrix, a full pont 'Art-icle-B' and pubic hairs 'Art-icle-C of theappellont atong with blood sod 'Article-D' A plain soi( 'Article-E' were sent for mediccri andlysis to the F.S.L. Presence of the blood was confirmed on chaddi 'Articte A-t', skirt 'Article A-2* of the prosecutrix ond full pont 'Article-B', pubic hair 'Art-icte-C of the appeltont dnd the stained soil. Presence of humon spermatozoa and semen was also confirmed on the skirt-, full point, pubic hair ound blood stained soi(. After comptetion of investigation, prosecution wois (ounched under Section 376 (2)(f) I.P.C. oigainst the (ippellont who abjured the guitt, pleaded innocence and led no evidence in defence. The prosecution exomined as many as 11 witnesses. The trial Judge relying upon the testimony of the prosecutrix which wos dully corroborated by medical evidence, report of Forensic Science Laboratory and orail evidence, convicted ond sentenced the dppellant os aforesaid in para-l (Supra). 4. Shri R.K. Jain, teomed counsel for the appellont whHe ossaiting the conviction referred to para 7 of the testimony of the prosecutrix and cirgued thot the appellant had only inserted two fingers inside the vciginal orifice of the prosecutrix/ resutting in bteeding therefrom. It wos contended that this oct of the appellant would at the most be an offence under Section 377 of the I.P.C. and not under Section 376 I.P.C. It was also contended that during medicat examination by br. Smt. S. Rajput P.W.6, the voginal slides of the prosecutrix wos not prepored which alone could have conclusively established whether penetration had taken ptace or not. It wos lostly contended thot the appettont woss undergoing sentence for almost six yeors, ound therefore, since the appellant was ayoun9 lad of 18 years at the time of occurrence, the sentence aworded should be reduced to the period already undergone by the appellant. On the other hond, Shri U.K.S.Chondel, lecrned Ponel Lawyer hos vehementty opposed the prayer of the leomed counsel for the o^petlant while contending thot the wholly unrebutted testimony of Amrita Bai P.W.I wos futty corroborated not only by the evidence of Dr. -^ Smt. S. Rajput P.W.6 but also by the report of the F.S.L. Ex.P.19. It was contended thot the conviction of the appeltont under Section 376 I.P.C. wos well founded ond considering the brutal monner in which the oppellont had committed roipe on a minor girt, the appellant did not deserve any (eniency in sentence awarded by the triat Court. 5. Havin9 heord rival contentions, I have gone through the record. Prosecutrix P.WA hos categorically stoted in para l that while she was retuming from cigricultural field, the appellant cought hold her, lifted her ond taking her to a nearby fietd committed sexud intercourse with her by penetrating his penis inside her vaginal orifice. She hos further stated that after subjecting her to such a forceful sexual assoult, the appellcnt insert-ed two fingers inside her va9ina which resulted in excessive bleeding. The contention of the leomed counsel for the appettant thot the appetloint had merety committed on unnaturoil offence under Section 3771.P.C. has to be start'ed onty to be rejected. The testimony of the prosecutrix cle<r(y shows that after satisfying his lust, the appeltant furt-her inserted two fingers inside her vagina which caused severe pain to the prosecutrix and resulted in excessive bteeding. Findings of Dr. Smt. S. Rajput P.W.6 which have been dealt with in pcra 15 of the judgment fulty corroborated the statement of the prosecutrix. It shows that the prosecutrix wos subjected to a very brutal sexual assoult. The report- of Forensic Science Laborotory Ex.P-19 also corroborotes the testimony of the prosecutrix. There is absotutely nothing to rebut the testimony -^- "••^ of the prosecutrix in her cross-examination. Her statement is natural, inspires confidence and is trustworthy. Dukala Bai P.W.3 mother of the prosecutrix has dso norrated that the prosecutrix had sustained excessive vagind bleeding for which she wos admitted in the Govemment Hospital at Durg. 6. Having thus considered the evidence led by the prosecution in its entirety, I cun of the considered opinion that it is fulty established beyond the shadow of omy doubt that the oippellant subjected the prosecutrix, a minor girl, to a very forceful sexual (ntercounse. So fotf' as the age of the prosecutrix is concerned, the testimony of Dr. Smt. S. Rajput only revealed or\ estimation that the prosecutrix, wos aged about 12 yeors. Since the evidence led by the prosecution did not establish beyond doubt that the prosecutrix wos a womon under 12 yeors of aQe, the leamed trial Judge hos rightty convicted the dppellont under Section 376 I.P.C. So for as the sentence awarded by the leomed trial Judge is concemed, in my considered opinion, considering the brutal manner in which a minor 9irl wois ravished, the appellont does not deserve dny (eniency. 7. In the result, conviction of the appellant under Section 376 I.P.C. dnd the sentence awarded thereunder by the trial Court does not calt for interference whatsoever. This appeal being devoid of merit is dismissed. Sd/- Dmp Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge 10.03.2006