Rajpal @ Baklu Cosde vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 2392 MP

                                                                       1
                                    IN     THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                          AT JABALPUR
                                                                BEFORE
                                                    HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE ANJULI PALO
                                                       ON THE 10 th OF FEBRUARY, 2023
                                                      CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2568 of 2021

                                   BETWEEN:-
                                   RAJPAL @ BAKLU COSDE S/O OMKAR, AGED ABOUT 38
                                   YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR R/O VILLAGE GONDRI,
                                   DISTT BURHANPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                     .....APPELLANT
                                   (BY SHRI M.K. TRIPATHI - ADVOCATE)

                                   AND
                                   THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR. SPECIAL
                                   POLICE KHAKNAR DISTRICT-BURHANPUR (MADHYA
                                   PRADESH)

                                                                                                    .....RESPONDENT
                                   (BY SHRI Y.D. YADAV - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

                                         Th is appeal coming on for hearing this day, t h e court passed the
                                   following:
                                                                      JUDGMENT

The appellant has preferred this appeal being aggrieved by the judgment

dated 05.04.2021 passed by the Third Additional Sessions Judge, Burhanpur in Sessions Trial No.54/2018, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 511 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years with fine of Rs.5000/- and Section 506 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year with fine of Rs.500/- respectively, with default stipulations.

Signature Not Verified

2. As per the prosecution case, on 25.07.2018 at about 6:00 p.m. when SAN

Digitally signed by RAJESH KUMAR the prosecutrix was returning to her home from the field on way, appellant JYOTISHI Date: 2023.02.13 18:39:04 IST

forcibly disrobed her inner (clothes) and tried to commit rape on her. The

prosecutrix successfully managed to escape herself. Thereafter she fled away from the spot and reached her home. She narrated entire incident to her husband, thereafter FIR was lodged at police station Khaknar, District Burhanpur and police registered crime against the appellant under Sections 376 & 506 of IPC. After due investigation, charge-sheet was filed before the competent Court for the aforesaid offences.

3. After committal of the case, learned trial Court framed charges under Sections 376 & 506 Part - II of IPC against the appellant. Thereafter, learned trial Court conducted trial against the appellant. The trial Court, after relying on testimonies of the prosecutrix and her family members as also on the medical

opinion formed, found the appellant guilty of aforesaid offences and sentenced him, as mentioned above.

4. The appellant challenged the findings of the trial Court on the ground that there is no direct evidence on record against him. There is a delay in lodging the FIR. The appellant further contended that prosecutrix was consenting party and she was willing to live with the appellant, but under the pressure of her family members, she lodged false FIR against him. It is further submitted that there are number of contradictions, improvements and omissions in the statements of prosecution witnesses. He further submits that appellant was on bail during trial and he did not misuse the liberty granted to him. It is further submitted that in medical examination, no injury has been found on the body of the prosecutrix. No opinion was given regarding recent sexual inercourse. The case of the prosecution is not corroborated by the medical Signature Not Verified SAN evidence. The trial Court has not followed the principles of natural justice. The Digitally signed by RAJESH KUMAR JYOTISHI findings of the trial Court are contrary to the law and facts. The trial Court has Date: 2023.02.13 18:39:04 IST

not properly appreciated the defence o f accused. There are some material infirmities in the prosecution case. Hence, the impugned judgment is liable to be set aside and the appellant is entitled to be acquitted of the aforesaid offence.

5. Learned Government Advocate for the State has strongly opposed the contentions raised by the appellant and submitted that there are sufficient evidence available on record against the appellant to convict him in the crime in question, therefore, this appeal is liable to be dismissed.

6 . Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Government Advocate for the respondent-State at length. Perused the record.

7. Prosecutrix (P.W.1) stated against the appellant as narrated in the FIR (Exhibit-P/1). Although, her testimony is corroborated by her husband-Manohar (P.W.4) and by the other prosecution witnesses, namely, Subhash (P.W.8) and Mangal (P.W.9). They belong to her village and stated that they saw the prosecutrix just after the incident on way to her home and she was crying. They asked the reason but she did not disclose the reason. Both the witnesses were elder to the prosecutrix and due to hesitation, she did not narrate them what happened with her. Their evidence is relevant under Section 8 of Evidence Act. Although some minor discrepancies are there, but on that ground alone their entire testimony cannot be brushed aside. Their evidence is seem reliable and trustworthy.

8. Although the husband of the prosecutrix Manhohar (PW/4) admitted that there was a dispute between the uncle of the appellant and him, but only for that the Court did not disbelieve the testimony of the prosecutrix, which was found trustworthy by the trial Court. Learned counsel for the appellant Signature Not Verified SAN

suggested that on the spot the surface was rough and some remaining particles Digitally signed by RAJESH KUMAR JYOTISHI

of sugarcane crops were also present on the land. Therefore, injuries must be Date: 2023.02.13 18:39:04 IST

caused to the prosecutrix, but Doctor (PW/2) only found two simple injuries on the prosecutrix. First was on below her right eye and second was on her cheek. There is possibility that during the incident all these injuries were caused to the prosecutrix. The appellant himself received injuries as stated by Dr. Ambar Joshi (PW/2). 5 abrasions reddish brown colour, two were in size of 1/4th cm and two were in size of 3/4 cm and one abrasion is about 1/2 cm of size. In para 3 Doctor did not rule out the possibility that it was caused by human nails.

9. Prosecutrix stated that she was taken away by the appellant forcefully. The appellant did not explain anything about his injuries. Presence of injuries on the accused/appellant also supported the prosecution case that at the time of the incident, he attempt to commit rape on the prosecutrix. Therefore, learned trial Court has rightly convicted the appellant.

10. After considering the entire evidence available on record and findings given by learned trial Court, this Court is of the opinion that the appellant has rightly been convicted by the trial Court. No interference is required; the trial Court has awarded proper sentence according to nature of crime and act of the appellant and is not required to be reduced.

11. Accordingly, appeal is hereby dismissed. Let a copy of this judgment be sent to the trial Court.

(SMT. ANJULI PALO) JUDGE rj

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by RAJESH KUMAR JYOTISHI Date: 2023.02.13 18:39:04 IST