Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sajan Singh Gond vs The State Of M.P. on 21 November, 2023
Author: Anuradha Shukla
Bench: Anuradha Shukla
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE ANURADHA SHUKLA
ON THE 21 st OF NOVEMBER, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2934 of 1998
BETWEEN:-
SAJAN SINGH GOND, S/O MAHAVIR SINGH GOND,
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, OCCUPATION AGRICULTURE,
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SARETHI, POLICE STATION
MAJHOULI, DISTRICT SIDHI (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI A. K. SINGH - ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE
STATION MAJHOULI, DISTRICT SIDHI
.....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI SATPAL CHADAR - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
Heard on : 18.10.2023
Pronounced on: 21.11.2023
This appeal having been heard and reserved for judgment, coming on
for pronouncement this day, the court passed the following:
JUDGMENT
The appellant in this case faced trial for an offence of Section 376 IPC in
Sessions Trial No.9/98 which was decided by Sessions Judge, Sidhi, on
30.9.1998 holding the appellant guilty of Section 376 IPC and sentencing him to
ten years rigorous imprisonment. Being aggrieved by that judgment, this appeal
has been preferred.
2 . Brief facts of the prosecution case are that the prosecutrix, aged
around 11 years, had gone to the forest area on 5.10.1997 at around 4:30 p.m.;
when she was with her goats, the appellant came there and asked her to come
along with him for searching missing goat, he took the prosecutrix to a deserted
place where he insisted her for sexual favour; upon her refusal, he forcibly
knocked her on the ground and committed rape with her; to throttle her voice,
he put the leaf and cloth in her mouth and even promised her Rs.20/-; he also
threatened to kill her; prosecutrix came back to her house along with the relative
of appellant; she narrated the incident to her parents; she was soaked in blood
and was crying; her father took her to Sarpanch and then to police station where
he lodged the FIR; the prosecutrix was medically examined in which it was
found that her hymen was recently ruptured and there was blood oozing out; the
matter was investigated and the charge-sheet was filed. Upon conclusion of
trial, the appellant was held convicted and accordingly sentenced under the
impugned judgment.
3. The ground taken in this appeal are that there was an enmity between
the appellant and the father of prosecutrix and this act was proved by Panch
Ramnarayan but the learned trial court did not consider this important aspect;
the FSL report, marked as Ex.P-5, tested negative for presence of semen or
sperm; the conviction of appellant was erroneous as the learned trial court did
not apply its mind to the facts of the case; merely for the presence of blood, it
could not be held that prosecutrix was raped. The prosecution failed to prove
its story beyond reasonable doubts and the benefit of doubt should have been
given to the appellant. Accordingly, it is prayed that the appeal be allowed and
the appellant be acquitted in the case.
4. State has opposed the present appeal by contending that the heinous
offence of rape was committed with a minor girl, aged only 11 years, and it was
duly proved, hence, no interference should be made in the finding of guilt and
the sentence passed by the learned trial court.
5. Record of the trial court has been perused and arguments of both the
parties have been heard.
6. In this case, appellant was tried for the offence of Section 376 IPC and
the victim in this case was the 11-year-old prosecutrix. To prove its case against
the appellant, prosecution has relied upon the testimony of prosecutrix (P.W.1),
her father (P.W.2), her mother (P.W.3) and Dr. Kalpana Ravi (P.W.4) who had
medically examined the prosecutrix on the date of incident itself. Sadan Singh
(P.W.5) registered the crime at Police Station, Majhauli, vide FIR, Ex.P-3, it
was received in his police station from Police Station, Kotwali, district Sidhi,
where it was originally registered. He recorded the statements of witnesses and
handed over the case diary to ASI Santosh Kumar Dwivedi for further
investigation. Santosh Kumar Dwivedi (P.W.6) continued with the part of
investigation but had to leave it midway on being transferred. Dr. S. B. Khare
(P.W.7) examined the appellant medically. Two defence witnesses were
examined on behalf of appellant.
7. According to the statements of prosecutrix (P.W.1), on the date of
incident the prosecutrix had accompanied the appellant to the forest for the
purpose of grazing her goats; she had come back to her house for lunch and
only upon the insistence of appellant, she again went to the forest along with
appellant; in the evening one of the goats went missing and again appellant
insisted the prosecutrix to come along with him to search for that goat; after the
goat was traced, the appellant requested the prosecutrix for sexual favour to
which she objected but appellant forcibly committed rape on her; he did not let
her to scream and promised her to pay Rs.20/-; he also threatened the
prosecutrix not to speak to anyone about the incident; after this incident, the
prosecutrix went to the relative of appellant, who was also present in the forest,
and narrated him the incident; the relative of appellant scolded him and escorted
the prosecutrix to her house; the prosecutrix told the incident to her parents and
then she went to Police Station, Kotwali, district Sidhi, and had the matter
reported. The statements of prosecutrix have been stable and credible
throughout her court testimony. Her parents P.W.2 and P.W.3 were though not
present on the place of incident, they have narrated the incident on the basis of
information given to them by the prosecutrix. No material contradiction was
highlighted during the cross-examination of these witnesses. Although the
relative of appellant, who escorted the prosecutrix to her house, has been
examined in defence but it can be easily assumed that for natural inclination
towards appellant, who was his close relative, he would noway have supported
the prosecution case.
8. Learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon the decision of the
Apex Court in Santosh Prasad alias Santosh Kumar v. The State of Bihar
(Criminal Appeal No.264/2020) in which it was argued that non-examination
of material independent witness was fatal to the prosecution story as it was
already suffering from serious doubts but in that judgment itself the Apex Court
has observed that to hold an accused guilty of commission of an offence of
rape, the solitary evidence of prosecutrix is sufficient provided the same
inspires confidence and appears to be absolutely trustworthy, unblemished and
should be of sterling quality. In the present case, an 11-year-old girl has
corroborated the prosecution story on all material points and the defence failed
to assail the truthfulness of her statements. She was consistent throughout her
statements, right from the starting point till the end and even her young age
could not deter her confidence or shake her credibility.
9. The defence has put emphasis on the fact that FSL report in this case
failed to prove the presence of sperm in the vaginal slide and the clothes of
prosecutrix and for this, the reliance on FSL report, marked as Ex.P-5, has
been placed. Before analyzing the result of FSL examination, it is pertinent to
refer to the observations made by Dr. Kalpana Ravi (P.W.4), who had
examined the prosecutrix on the date of incident. She had found that the hymen
was recently ruptured from where there was heavy bleeding and prosecutrix was
having severe pain. The underwear was soaked in blood and according to
doctor, the prosecutrix was forcefully raped within 24 hours of her medical
examination. There was also a lacerated wound present in her vagina. The
observations made by Dr. Kalpana Ravi about forcible rape could not have
been challenged in the cross-examination. It was suggested that the prosecutrix
sustained injuries in her vagina for some other reason but Dr. Kalpana Ravi
denied any such possibility. Thus, her testimony has proved that prosecutrix
sustained injury in her private part on account of forcible sexual intercourse and
she was positively raped.
10. Now comes the question whether on the basis of FSL examination
report, a finding of innocence can be given in favour of appellant? Let us
assume a case where the prosecutrix has turned hostile and only the FSL report
is positive. The question arises whether in such set of facts the accused can be
held guilty; the answer is a definite "NO" and the reason for this simple answer
is that the FSL examination report has only a probative value and it cannot
assume the importance of a substantial piece of evidence. In the present case,
the statements of prosecutrix have been corroborated not only by the testimony
of her parents but also by the medical evidence available on record. The version
narrated by the prosecutrix has consistently matched with the version of her
parents and also with the medical evidence. Therefore, merely on the basis of
negative FSL report for which heavy bleeding from the vaginal part of
prosecutrix, as was observed by Dr. Kalpana Ravi, could be the reason, this
court cannot agree with the arguments submitted by learned counsel for the
appellant that in the light of negative FSL report, the appellant should be
acquitted in the case.
1 1 . The appellant has relied upon the testimony of two defence
witnesses, namely Ramnarayan (D.W.1), who was the Sarpanch of village at the
time of incident, and his relative Sampat Singh (D.W.2) who accompanied and
escorted the prosecutrix to her house after the incident. It has been claimed by
Sarpanch Ramnarayan (D.W.1) that there was a property dispute between the
two parties and for that reason, the father of prosecutrix had falsely implicated
the appellant in this case. Contrary to it, the relative of appellant, namely Sampat
Singh (D.W.2), has admitted that on the date of incident, the prosecutrix was in
the forest for the purpose of grazing her goats and at around 4-5 p.m. in the
evening, she returned to Sampat Singh and told him that she was bleeding from
her urinal tract. Although this witness has expressed ignorance on the point
whether the appellant had accompanied the prosecutrix to the forest but this is a
relevant fact that prosecutrix was sharing her pain and suffering with a close
relative of appellant.
1 2 . This court is of the opinion that had there been any animosity
between the two parties resulting into false implication of appellant in a serious
case of rape, neither the prosecutrix would have accompanied the appellant and
his relative to the forest nor would have revealed the injury sustained in her
private part to witness Sampat Singh (D.W.2). Thus, the theories set up by the
appellant in his defence are absurdly contradictory - one suggests of false
implication on account of animosity while the other suggests of good
relationship between the two sides. These contradictory pleas have not been
proved by cogent evidence nor do they inspire any confidence, therefore, these
pleas are dismissed in their entirety. It may also be mentioned here that the
aspect of enmity between the two parties was never suggested to the
prosecution witnesses of facts i.e. the prosecutrix and her parents. Therefore,
the defence story is entirely unbelievable.
13. Having considered the facts of the case and the circumstances in
which an 11 year old young girl was subjected to forcible rape resulting into
heavy bleeding through private part, this court finds no reasonable ground to
interfere with the finding of conviction and also the sentence passed by the trial
court. On the basis of this analysis, the conviction and sentence passed against
the appellant do not deserve any interference. Accordingly, this appeal stands
dismissed.
14. The appellant is on bail. His bail bonds are discharged and it is
directed that he be sent to jail to suffer the remaining part of his sentence.
15. Let a copy of this judgment along with the record be sent back to the
trial court for information and compliance.
(ANURADHA SHUKLA)
JUDGE
ps
Date: 2023.11.22 13:09:11 +05'30'
