HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (Hon. Mr. Justice Pritinker Diwaker) Criminal Appeal No. 593 of 1993 APPELLANT Raj Kumar son of Videshi Gond. VERSUS RESPONDENT State of Madhya Pradesh ' Shri Dhirendra Pandey, counsel for the appellant. Shri Pravin Das Dy. GA for respondent/State. CRIMINAL APPEAL UNDER SECTION 374 12} OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE JUDGMENT (04.03.201 0) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 30.4.1993 passed 'by Additional Sessions Judge, Dhamtari, in Sessions Triai No. 773/1991 convicting the accused/appellant for the offence punishable under Section 376 IPC and sentencing‘him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years. 2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that on 20.8.1990 FIR (Ex. P-9) was lodged by the prosecutrix (PW-7) aged about 19 years at ‘ the relevant time alleging that on 19.8.1990 she was returning to her maternal home along with her mother namely Phul Bai (PW-8) and three other ladies namely Ram Bai (PW-10), Rajantin Bai and Maharin Bai and when on account of being tired she was taking rest by Sitting near a place known as Bhoma accused/appellant came there on bicycle and offered to drop her at home Though the prosecutrix showed her dismclination to succumb to the offer of the accused/appellant, she was made to occupy his bicycle and taken to ¢ a nearby jungle and committed forcible sexualintercougse with her. 3. ln order to establish the' guilt of the accused/appellant the prosecution has examined 12 Witnesses Statement of the accused/appellant was also recorded under Section 313 of the Code x ~2__ 0f Criminal Procedure in which he denied the charge levelled against him and pleaded his innocence and false implication in the case. 4. After hearing the parties the trial Court has convicted and sentenced the accused / appellant for the offence as mentioned above. 5. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record including the judgment under challenge. 6. Counsel for the appellant submits that from the statement of the prosecutrix (PW-7) it is clear that she was a consenting party to the act of the accused/appellant. He submits that a very unnatural story has been given by the prosecutrix that she was taken by the accused/appellant on bicycle to a jungle and subjected to forcible sexual intercourse by him. He submits that mother of the prosecutrix namely Phul Bai (PW—8) and one Ram Bai (PW-10) have not supported the case of the prosecution. According to him, even the medical report of the prosecutrix does not support her version. 7. On the other hand, counsel for the respondent/State supports the judgment impugned and submits that the statement of the prosecutrix alone is suffiCient to convict the accused. He submits that the accused/appellant himself has made extra judicial confession before brother of the prosecutrix namely Sirmo (PW-9) and that pieces of broken bangles and sari of the prosecutrix were seized from the spot vide Ex. P—5 and Ex. P—10 respectively which has been duly proved by Phul Singh (PW-4) . According to the State counsel the FIR has been lodged very promptly and the report of chemical, analysis (Ex. P—13) also supports the‘case of the prosecution confirming presence of spermatozoa on the petticoat and sari of the prosecutrix and in these circumstances the conviction of accused/appellant under Section 376 IPC being just and proper does not call for any interference in this appeal. ,N 8. Prosecutrix (PW-7) has categorically stated in her evidence that on the occasion of Tija festival when she was going to her maternal home on foot along with her mother and being tired when she was taking rest on the way, accused/appellant came there on bicycle and offered to drop her at home. She has stated that though she was not willing to go with the accused/appellant on his bicycle, he forcibly took her to a nearby jungle where she was subjected to sexual intercourse against her will and without her consent. She has stated thatthe place where the incident had taken place nobody was present at the relevant time. She has stated that despite her resistance to the act of the accused/appellant, she was thrown on the ground and subjected to forcible sexual intercourse on account of which her bangles were broken and sari worn by her was torn. According to this witness, on the date of incident she was carrying five months pregnancy She has denied the suggestion put to her by the accused that she had accompanied him at her own and she was a consenting party to the act of the accused/appellant This Witness has further stated that after reaching home, she narrated the entire incident to her brother namely Sirmo (PW-9) and thereafter the report was lodged on the next day. Statement of this witness has been’duly corroborated by her brother Sirmo (PW—9) to whom she had narrated the incident. This witness has categorically stated that after being informed by her sister (the prosecutrix) he had gone to the village of the accused/appellant and asked him as to why he had physically exploited his sister on which the accused had admitted his guilt and pleaded to be pardoned Though the statement of prosecutrix has not been supported by her mother Phul Bar (PW-8) and Ram Bar (PW-10) statement of the prosecutrix itself appears to be trustworthy and therefore corroboration of her testimony from any other source is not necessary. ln addition to this, report of the chemical analyst Ex. P-13 confirms the presence‘ of spermatozoa on the petticoat and sari of the prosecutrix. Seizure of broken bangles and torn sari of the prosecutrix was made from the spot itself vide E‘x. P-5 and Ex. P-10) respectively. Investigating Officer D.P. Bhoi (PW-12) has also fully supported the case of the prosecution. 93¢ s / m‘v ,Q_ Thus on carefu! analysis of the factual background of the case with the help of material available on record, what is perceivediby this Court is that by making the prosecutrix who at the relevant ti'me was carrying pregnancy of five months, occupy his bicyCIe perforce the accused/appellant took her to a place free from public movement and made her the victim of his lust. Her testimony giving the detailed account of the incident being self sufficient does not look for corroboration from any other source and the conviction of the accused/appellant based thereon being flawless need not be shaken in appeal 9. 10. In the result, the appeal being devoid of substance is liable to be dismissed and it is dismissed as such. Findings recorded by the Court below convicting and‘sentencln‘g the accused/appellant being fully in consonance with the material available on record are left undisturbed. Appellant is reported to be on bail. His bail bends are cancelled. He be sent to prison forthwith to serve out the remainder of sentence. M V $di~ 1 Pritinker Diwatter ‘ Judge, We. a ll l. l ‘l .