1. Challenge in this appeal is to a judgment dated 12.09.2006 of
learned Addl. Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.181/2006 arising out of
FIR No.191/03 by which the appellant – Sanjay Kumar was convicted for
committing offences punishable under Sections 376/448 IPC. By an order
dated 21.09.2006, he was sentenced to undergo RI for seven years with
fine `1,000/- under Section 376 IPC and RI for six months with fine `500
under Section 448 IPC. Both the sentences were to operate concurrently.
Crl.A.No.914/2006 Page 1 of 8
2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case as projected in the
charge-sheet was that on 25.02.2003 at 02.00 pm after committing house
trespass at D4/363, Sultanpuri, the appellant committed rape upon the
prosecutrix ‘X’ (assumed name) aged around 27 years. She was criminally
intimidated and robbed of her jewellery articles and cash `9,000/-. Police
machinery came into motion on receiving information about the incident
at 02.55 pm on 25.02.2003 and DD No.58B (Ex.PW-7/A) came into
existence at PS Sultanpuri. The investigation was assigned to ASI Kaptan
Singh who with Const.Parminder went to the spot. After recording
victim’s statement (PW-8/A), he lodged First Information Report. The
prosecutrix was medically examined; she recorded her 164 Cr.P.C.
statement. The accused was arrested and taken for medical examination.
Statements of the witnesses conversant with the facts were recorded.
Exhibits collected during investigation were sent for examination to
Forensic Science Laboratory. Upon completion of investigation, a charge-
sheet was filed against the appellant for offences under Sections
323/376/380/506/397/452 IPC. By an order dated 07.02.2004, the
appellant was charged for committing offences under Sections
448/377/376/323/380/506 part-II IPC to which he pleaded not guilty and
claimed trial. To establish its case, prosecution examined fifteen
Crl.A.No.914/2006 Page 2 of 8
witnesses. In 313 Cr.P.C. statement, the appellant pleaded false
implication and denied complicity in the crime. He did not produce any
evidence in defence. On appreciation of the evidence and after
considering the rival contentions of the parties, the Trial Court, by the
impugned judgment held the appellant guilty for committing offence
under Sections 376/448 IPC. It is apt to note that the appellant was
acquitted of the charges under Sections 380/506 part-II/ 377 IPC. State did
not challenge the said acquittal.
Source: Indian Kanoon