Amar Singh s/o Vanshilal vs State of Madhya Pradesh

Relying upon the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the Case of Bani Singh & others vs. State of U.P., AIR 1996 SC 2439, the matter has

been heard in absence of counsel of the appellant.

The appellant has filed the present appeal challenging the judgment dated 07/04/2004 passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Khandwa

in Sessions Trial No.211/2003 thereby convicting the appellant for committing an offence under Section 376 of the IPC with R.I. for 10 years and

fine of Rs.1000/- in default to payment of fine, further RI for 6 months.

In short the prosecution story is that the prosecutrix was a minor of 10 years at the time of incident. The appellant is residing near the house of

the prosecutrix. The father of the prosecutrix was went outside the city on 07/10/2003, at that time, the appellant has taken away the prosecutrix

and committed rape on her and threatened to kill her. The prosecutrix after two days of incident informed the said incident to her mother and when

her father returned to the house, he lodged an FIR on 12/10/2003 against the appellant. The prosecutrix was medically examined and as per

medical report, she was minor at the time of incident. After completion of the investigation, the challan has been filed before the competent Court.

Since the matter is under trial to the Court of Session, therefore, the same was committed to the Sessions Court from where it was received by the

trial Court for trial.

During the pendency of the trial Dr. Pushp Raj Singh (PW-9) was examined as well as the prosecutrix was also examined. The statement made

by the prosecutrix was corroborated by the medical report, therefore, on he basis of said evidence as well as the statement of PW-1 Laxmi Bai,

who is the mother of the prosecutrix, the trial Court has convicted the appellant for committing an offence under Section 376 of the IPC. While

passing of the impugned judgment, the trial Court has taken into consideration over all evidence adduced by the prosecutrix and the age of the

prosecutrix also.

After going through the order as well as the evidence adduced by the witnesses, in my opinion, the findings recorded by the trial Court is just

and proper, therefore, I do not find any reason to interfere into the findings given by the Sessions Court. The conviction of the appellant imposed

by the trial Court is hereby upheld. During the pendency of this appeal, the appellant was not enlarged on bail and he has already completed the jail

sentence imposed by the trial Court, therefore, no further orders for conviction is required to be passed.

Accordingly, the present appeal is hereby dismissed.