1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR J U D G M E N T Purna Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan D.B.CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.566/2003 against the judgment dt.10.4.03 passed by the learned Addl.Sessions Judge, Deedwana, in Sessions Case No.16/2002. Date of Judgment: 4th May, 2009 P R E S E N T HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.KAPADIA HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DEO NARAYAN THANVI Mr.R.K.Charan, for appellant. Mr.S.S.Sharma, Public Prosecutor. BY THE COURT : (PER THANVI J.) 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment passed by the learned Addl.Sessions Judge, Deedwana dated 10.4.2003, whereby he has convicted the accused appellant Purna Ram of the offence u/s.366A IPC and sentenced him to undergo seven years' R.I. together with a fine of Rs.500/- & in default, to further undergo three months' R.I. Accused Purna Ram has also been 2 convicted of the offence u/s.376 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment together with a fine of Rs.500/- & in default, to further undergo three months' R.I. 2. The charge against the accused appellant Purna Ram was that on 11.4.02, when Poonam aged 5 years, daughter of complainant Gopal Lal, was playing outside the house, he took her in the field and committed rape with her and thereafter she was sent back by giving ice cream and one & half rupee. The wife of complainant noticed the panty of the girl Poonam being blood stained and on being asked, she narrated the whole incident to her mother. The report of the incident was lodged on 16.4.02 by Gopal Lal, father of the girl, at the Police Station, Khunkhuna. Upon this, a case under ss.366A & 376 IPC was registered against the accused and investigation was commenced. After investigation, the accused appellant was chargesheeted for the abovesaid offences. The case was committed to the court of Sessions, where the charges were framed accordingly against the accused, to which he pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined 14 witnesses. The statement of the accused was recorded u/s.313 CrPC. 3 He led no defence. After hearing the arguments, the learned trial Judge convicted & sentenced the accused appellant as above. 3. The incident of rape narrated by the girl Poonam has been brought on record by the evidence of her father Gopal Lal PW 1, Smt.Kevki, PW 2 who is grand mother of the prosecutrix and also by Sharda, PW 4, her mother to whom she narrated the story. Though the girl has not been examined by the prosecution being a child of 5 years but the factum of rape has been corroborated by the medical evidence of Dr.Anil Kumar Sharma, PW 10 and also by the investigating officer Ramdev, PW 12, when she was questioned by him. Learned counsel for the accused appellant submits that in this case, the prosecutrix has not been examined being 5 years of age and if this Court finds that the case is made out against the accused on the basis of the evidence of her father, mother and grand mother supported by the testimony of Dr.Anil Kumar Sharma, PW 10 and investigating Officer Ramdev, PW 12, then he does not want to question the legality of the conviction and submits that he may be awarded lesser sentence because accused appellant Purna Ram is a 4 young boy of less than 25 years of age. That apart, he has been languishing in jail for last more than seven years, which is minimum punishment provided under the law. 4. It is true that in this case, the FIR has been lodged by the delay of five days and the prosecutrix being of the age of five years, has not been examined but from the evidence of her father, mother and grand mother, there does not appear to be any reason to disbelieve their testimony, as there was no enmity or other reason to falsely implicate the accused appellant for committing rape with a minor girl, as held by the learned trial Judge on the basis of the prosecution evidence as also the medical evidence. 5. So far as the sentence part is concerned, there also seems no special or adequate reasons to award the lesser sentence than provided-for under the law, which is ten years, in the case covered under Clause (f) of sub-section (2) of Section 376 IPC. However, the sentence of life imprisonment appears to be excessive in view of the fact that the accused appellant being village labourer and young boy of 24 years of age at the 5 time of commission of offence having long life to lead, we, therefore, deem it proper that the minimum sentence provided under Section 376(2) for committing rape with a minor girl of less than 12 years, which is ten years, will suffice the ends of justice. 6. Accordingly, we allow this appeal in part. While maintaining the conviction & sentence of the accused appellant Purna Ram of the offence u/s.366A IPC with seven years' R.I. alongwith a fine of Rs.500/- & in default, to further undergo three months' R.I. recorded by the learned Addl.Sessions Judge Deedwana vide his judgment dt.10.4.03, we reduce the sentence of life imprisonment u/s.376 IPC to ten years' R.I., which is minimum sentence, provided under the law. However, the amount of fine of Rs.500/- on this count is maintained, in default of which he will further undergo three months' R.I. Both the substantive sentences shall run concurrently. (DEO NARAYAN THANVI), J. (A.M.KAPADIA), J. RANKAWAT JK, PS