Saturday, 16, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Ramchandra vs The State Of M.P.
2024 Latest Caselaw 3724 MP

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 3724 MP
Judgement Date : 8 February, 2024

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Ramchandra vs The State Of M.P. on 8 February, 2024

Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla

Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla

                                                                    1
                                  IN     THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                         AT INDORE
                                                           BEFORE
                                           HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
                                                     ON THE 8 th OF FEBRUARY, 2024
                                                   CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1081 of 1999

                                 BETWEEN:-
                                 1.    RAMCHANDRA (DELETED AS PER COURT ORDER
                                       DATED 24.8.2018)

                                 2.    RADHESHYAM S/O LAXMAN, AGE 35 YEARS, R/O
                                       VILLAGE TAPARIYAHEDI, TAHSIL JEERAPUR,
                                       DISTRICT  RAJGARH     BIOARA    (MADHYA
                                       PRADESH)

                                                                                                  .....APPELLANT
                                 (BY SHRI SHIVENDRA SINGH RAWAT - ADVOCATE )

                                 AND
                                 THE STATE OF M.P. THROUGH P.S. JEERAPUR,
                                 DISTRICT RAJGARH (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                 .....RESPONDENT
                                 (BY SHRI TARUN PAGARE -G.A. )

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

Initially, the appeal was filed by appellants Ramchandra and Radheshyam. During the pendency of appeal, appellant NO.1-Ramchandra died. By order dated 24.8.2018, the Court directed to delete the name of appellant No.1 after verification of death of appellant No.1.

In view of aforesaid, the present appeal is abated so far as appellant NO.1-Ramchandra is concerned.

Considered the appeal on behalf of appellant No.2-Radheshyam.

Signing time: 2/8/2024 5:33:32

T his is appeal u/S 374 of the Cr.P.C. arising out of judgment of conviction and sentence dated 12.08.1999 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge, Rajgarh (Bioara) in S.T.No.103/1995 whereby the appellant has been convicted under section 366 and 376 IPC and sentenced to undergo 5 years RI and 10 years RI with fine of Rs.5000/- with default stipulation.

Prosecution story is that on 15.05.1995 when the prosecutrix had gone to forest in the night at 8-9 p.m. then accused Anarsingh, Radheshyam and Ramchandra kidnapped her and her mouth was shut and on the point of knife, she was taken to the forest of village Kuanpan. It is alleged that accused Radheshyam and Ramchandra committed rape with her. After sometime one

Guddu of his community met her and got her released from them. Thereafter she went to her maternal uncle's village at Bhopalpura and met her brother Suresh and narrated the entire story. Thereafter the written complaint was made to Collector, Rajgarh vide Ex.P/1 and case was registered at P.S. Jeerapur vide Ex.P/7. After investigation chargesheet was filed.

2. The accused abjured their guilt and pleaded that they are innocent and have been falsely implicated.

3. Trial court framed two issues -

(i) whether the prosecutrix was kidnapped by the accused persons against her will with an intention to commit rape ?

(ii) whether accused Radheshyam and Ramchandra committed rape with her against her will ?

4. The prosecution examined the prosecutrix as PW-1, her maternal uncle Anarsingh (PW-2), brother Sureshchandra (PW-7) Dr. Smt. Joshi (PW-3), Dr. Yogendra Shrivastava (PW-4) and husband of the prosecutrix Lalsingh (PW-6)

Signing time: 2/8/2024 5:33:32

and Investigating Officer R.D.Morya. Prosecutrix narrated that when she had gone to forest for nature call and cleaning her mouth, at that time accused Anarsingh, Radheshyam and Ramchandra caught hold her and shut her mouth at the point of knife and she was taken to forest. It is alleged that accused Ramchandra and Radheshyam committed rape with her She has made a specific allegation of rape against the accused Ramchandra and Radheshyam. Anarsingh (PW-2) also supported the version of prosecutrix and stated that Guddu had brought the prosecutrix to him and narrated the entire story. Her statement is further corroborated by the testimony of her brother Sureshchandra, who also stated that prosecutrix had narrated the incident. Investigating Officer, RD.Morya (PW-8) deposed that on the written complaint submitted to Collector, he got instructions to investigate the matter and thereafter he recorded the statement of prosecutrix and her brother and submitted his report ExP/7. The prosecutrix was sent for medical examination. Dr Smt. Chhaya Joshi (PW-3) deposed that on 20.5.1995 she conducted medical examination of the prosecutrix and she found abrasions on knee and thigh with minor injuries. Her report is ExP/2. She further deposed that prosecutrix was found to be habitual of intercourse but no definite opinion of rape can be given. Investigating Officer R.DMorya (PW-8) further stated that vaginal slides were sent to FSL, Gwalior. Its report is Ex.P/14 and in the report,

the presence of semen has been affirmed.

5. The defence has examined Guddu as DW-1. He did not support the version of prosecutrix

6. After hearing learned counsel for parties and taking into consideration the testimony of prosecutrix (PW-1), Anarsingh (PW-2) and Sureshchandra

Signing time: 2/8/2024 5:33:32

(PW-7), it is proved beyond doubt that accused persons had kidnapped the prosecutrix with an intention to commit rape against her will. Her testimony is further corroborated by Dr. Smt. Joshi (PW-3) and Dr. Yogendra Shrivastava (PW-4). Thus, the statement of prosecutrix and other witnesses is well corroborated with medical evidence. There is nothing in the cross examination or in defence to dislodge the testimony of prosecutrix and other witnesses which is well corroborated with the medical evidence.

7. In view of aforesaid, there is no error in the judgment passed by trial court. Criminal Appeal is dismissed. The conviction and sentence of appellant under section 366 and 376 IPC is maintained.

Trial court is directed to take steps for arrest of appellant -Radheshyam for serving the remaining jail sentence.

(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) JUDGE MK

Signing time: 2/8/2024 5:33:32

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter