,'?>1'l'ii^.s' .^!^^ ./ . <;':' i' ' X;sis' ••^..;^;S";^;rSEi:L!:' CFOOOOOS8224 IN THE HIGH CGURT OF MADHyA PRADESH A T JABALPUR. CRIMINAL 'APPEAL N0. OF 1994. APPHLLANT/Accysed {In JaTTT R6SPONDEOT Anandi, son of ChunglAlal Satnaai, aged 22 years, Besident ef Village KhajrifP.S. Khairagarli'' Dist.rict- Rajnandgaon (M.P.) ... VER S U S . i . The State of M.P. -' through D.M. Rajnandgaon (M.P.) i APPEAL UNDE.R SECTION 374 OF THE CGDE OF CRIMINAL EROCB3URE . HIGH COURT OFCHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR / Hon'bie Bflr. Jusfice Pritinker Diwaker Criminal Appeal No. 475 of 1994 APPELLANT Anandi son of Chungilal Satnami Versus RESPONDENT The State of Madhya Pradesh Shri Dharmesh Shrivastava, counsel forthe appellant. Shri Vaibhav Goverdhan, P.L. forthe State/respondent. CRIMINAL APPEAL UNDERSECTION 374 OF THRCODE OF CRiMINAL PROCEDURE JUDGMENT (23.07.2010) Present appeal arises out of the impugned judgment and order dated 3.3.1994 passed by Additlonai Sessions Judge, Khairagarh in Sessions Trial No. 133/1993 convicting the accused/appellant under Sections 376 and 450 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years u/s 376 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for three years u/s 450 IPC. 2. Facts of the case in brief are that on 11.11.1992 at about ).15 hours F.I.R. (Ex.P-1) was lodged by the prosecutrix aged|24 years alleging that on 10.11.1992 at about 7 pm when she had gone to old house from the new one, accused/appellant also reached there and after throwing her on the ground, committed forcible sexual infercourse with her. After investigation, challan was filed on 31.5.1993 and the court below framed the charges on 8.10.1993 for the offences under Sections 450 and 376 of fhe Indian Penal Code. 3. So as to hold the accused/appellantguilty, prosecution has examined 07 witnesses in support of its case. Statement of the accused/appeliant was also recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in which he denied the charges tevelled against him and pfeaded his innocence and false implication in the case. ^' 4. After hearing the parties the trial couri: has convicted and sentenced the accused/appellant as mentioned above. 5. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record including judgment impugned. 6. Counsel for the appellant submits that present is a case of false implication and that the story put forth by the prosecution being full of inconsistencies appears to be highly untrustworthy and based on that accused/appellant cannot be convicted for the offences as alleged against him. He submits that if a lady is thrown on the ground and subjected to forcible intercourse, she isbound tosustain some injury 6n her body but in this case doctorwho had medically examined her has opined that no injury whatsoever was noticed by her. 7. On the other hand, supporting the impugned judgment it has been argued on behalf of the State that in the case in hand the prosecutrix had lodged the report very promptly and therefore, the fact that the prosecutrix has not sustained any injury does not in any manner adversely affect the case of the prosecution. According to him, there is absolutely no evidence on record to indicate the false implication of the accused/appellant at the hands of the prosecutrix. 8. Prosecutrix (PW-1) in her Court statement has stated that she knew the accused/appellant as he belonged to the same village. According to her, sheowns two houses in the village and on the date of incident at about 7 pm when she had gone to the old house from the new one and as soon as after opening the door she had entered therein, the accused/appellant came there, threw her on the field and after upturning her sari and petticoat committed forcible sexual intercourse with her. She has stated that when she tried to raise an alarm, the accused/appellant gagged her mouth with the towel. She has stated that thereafter she came back to her new house and narrated the incident to her mother-in- law, father-in-law and the husband who were present there and then the matter was reported tothe villagers and in pursuance of the decision taken by them the report was lodged in the police il; ''lSSSa. "VK^i^&h. \ "% ./• -.;.. ^0-rfS'' ^' l«^....._.w1-' Jyo station. In cross-examination, this witness stood firm to the statement made by her in the examination-in-chief. Jeeralal (PW- 3) - the husband of the prosecutrix has also supported the prosecution case stating that after reaching home, prosecutrix had narrated the entire incident to him describing the manner in which it had taken place. Soam Singh (PW-4) is the Patwari who had prepared the spot map. Dr. Kishore Kumar Jain (PW-6) is the witness who had medicatty examined the accused/appellant and according to him the accused/appetlant was capable of performing sexual intercourse. Dr. (Smt.) L.D. Jindani (PW-2) is the witness who had medically examined the prosecutrix. According to this witness no injury whatsoever was noticed by her on the body of the prosecutrix but on touch, she was complaining pain on her private part. The report submitted by her is (Ex.P-4).This witness has also stated that the prosecutrix was accustomed to sex. 9. It is the settled legal position that when the statement of the prosecutrix does not appear to suffer from any inconsistency, contradiction or omission, no corroboration from any other source is required in such cases. Same is the position in the case in hand. Prosecutrix has narrated the incident in a very graphic manner and it being highly trustworthy inspires full confidence of this Court.In this view of the matter, the findings recorded by the Court below convicting and sentencing the accused/appellant being based on due appreciation of the evidence available on record do not make this Court to disturbthe judgment passed by the Court below. The Court below has taken note of each and every aspect of the matter while convlcting and sentencing the accused/appeilants by the judgment impugned. 10. Consequently, the appeal being without substance is liable to be dismissed. It is dismissed as such. The judgment impugned is hereby maintained. The accused/appellant is on bail. His bail bonds stand cancelled. He be sent to jail immediately for serving out the remaining sentence. -——Sdf- pritinker Diwaker Judge