[Cites 9, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Lale @ Lallu Ravat vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 24 February, 2026
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:15874
1 CRA-565-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RATNESH CHANDRA SINGH BISEN
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 565 of 2016
LALE @ LALLU RAVAT
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Sudhanshu Singh Chouhan - Advocate for appellant.
Shri Ajay Tamrakar - Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.
Reserved on : 05/02/2026
Delivered on : 24/02/2026
JUDGMENT
Per: Justice Ratnesh Chandra Singh Bisen
This criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. is filed by the
appellant being aggrieved of the judgment dated 12.02.2016 passed by the
learned 1s t Additional Sessions Judge, Sidhi, District Sidhi in S.T.
No.60/2014, whereby the learned trial Court has convicted and sentenced the
appellant in following terms as under :-
Conviction Sentence
Imprisonment
Section Act Imprisonment Fine
in lieu of fine
R.I. for 5 R.I for 3
450 I.P.C. Rs.1,000/-
years months
376 of
I.P.C. &
IPC r/w Additional R.I.
POCSO R.I. for Life Rs.10,000/-
Section 3/4 of for 1 -1 year
Act
POCSO Act
2. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that, as per the prosecution
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:15874
2 CRA-565-2016
case, on 17.02.2014 at about 08:30 p.m., when the prosecutrix, aged about 8
years, was at home with her two nieces and her mother, brother, and sister-in-
law had gone to attend a Barahon function at a relative's house, the
appellant/accused allegedly committed forcible sexual intercourse with her
without her consent. It is further submitted that the appellant is innocent and
has been falsely implicated due to a prior dispute between him and the mother
of the prosecutrix. It is also contended that there are several contradictions,
omissions, and improvements in the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses,
and therefore no implicit reliance can be placed upon such evidence.
Additionally, it is argued that the medical report does not support the version
of the prosecutrix, and according to the doctor, no definite opinion regarding
forcible sexual intercourse could be given by Dr Babita Khare (PW-9) and as
per her opinion, an attempt was made to have sexual intercourse with victim.
In such a situation, the accused cannot be held guilty under Section 376 IPC
r/w Section 3/ 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012. In
these circumstances, it is prayed that the judgment of conviction and sentence
passed by the learned trial Court be set aside and the appellant be acquitted
from the aforesaid charges.
3. Shri Ajay Tamrakar, learned Public Prosecutor for the State,
supported the judgment of conviction passed by the trial Court.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
5. From the evidence of Lavkush Pandey (PW-8), it appears that in the
Scholar Register of the Govt. High School, Paigma victim's date of birth is
recorded as 08.08.2005 at Sl. No.1868. This witness had also produced the
original record/register of Session year 2006 before trial Court, which is Ex.P-
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:15874
3 CRA-565-2016
6. On the basis of his evidence, it appears that victim's date of birth is
08.08.2005 and the date of incident is 17.02.2014. Mother of victim (PW-2)
and Bhagirathi Kol (PW-3) have also stated that the age of victim was eight
years and that fact was not challenged by the defence counsel in the cross-
examination of those witnesses. As far as the question of the age of the victim
is admittedly proved that at the time of incident, she was less than 10 years.
6 . Prosecutrix (PW-1) deposed in her statement that at the time of
incident, she was studying in Class-III in Government School, Village
Paigma. There was Barho function at the house of her elder sister and she
along with her all family members went there. Due to sleep, she came back to
her house along with her two nieces. While she was sleeping in her house, the
accused came, caught hold of her, inserted his hand inside her underwear, and
thereafter inserted his penis into her vagina, causing bleeding. Upon her
raising an alarm and crying, her sister-in-law (bhabhi) arrived, and the accused
fled away. She informed her mother about the incident, who in turn informed
other family members. She was in pain and bleeding from her vagina. The
next morning, her mother took her to Police Station Bahri, where the report
(Ex.P-1) was lodged. Her consent for medical examination was obtained
(Ex.P-2). In cross-examination, she denied the suggestion that she had not
identified the accused and reaffirmed that she had identified him.
7. PW-2, the mother of the prosecutrix, stated that at the relevant time
her daughter was 8 years old and studying in Class III. When she returned
home, she found her daughter crying and bleeding from her private parts. The
prosecutrix informed her that the accused had committed a wrongful act with
her. Due to the late hour, she did not lodge the report the same night but went
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:15874
4 CRA-565-2016
to Police Station Bahri the next morning. She accompanied her daughter to
District Hospital, Sidhi, for medical examination and gave consent (Ex.P-2).
8. P.W.-3, brother of prosecutrix, deposed that at about 10:00 p.m. his
wife informed him on mobile phone that Lale @ Lallu Rawat raped his sister
in his house at about 08:30 p.m. Upon receiving the information, he returned
to his house and saw that his sister was lying in the house and told him that
accused Lale came into her house, took off her panty and committed rape with
her.
9. Smt. Mohniya (PW-4) deposed that on the date of incident, a Barhon
function was organized at her house and they were busy in serving food to the
relatives, then after hearing the noise, she came to the house of victim and saw
that victim was lying on the floor. The blood was oozing out from the private
part of the victim and the clothes of victim were wet with blood and she was
crying.
10. Sobhnath Kol (PW-5) has also deposed that on the date of incident
in the night, after hearing the noise, he reached the place of occurrence and
saw that victim was weeping and lying on the floor and her underwear was
stained with blood. Victim had told her mother that accused Lale had raped
her. Police had also prepared the spot map Ex.P-4.
11. Savita Rawat (PW-6) has supported the prosecution story and stated
that phone of her husband came on her mobile, then she came out from her
house and she was talking her husband, then the accused came out from her
uncle's house and accused ran away. After hearing the noise, she went to her
uncle's house and saw that the blood was oozing out from the private part of
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:15874
5 CRA-565-2016
the victim and victim was lying in the bed (charpai) at that time. Victim told
her that accused Lale had come into her house and he forcibly committed
sexual intercourse with her.
12. Sukhdev (PW-7) stated that on the next day of the incident, he came
to know about the incident when police came. The police had arrested the
accused Lale @ Lalle Rawat and took him away.
13. Smt. Sangeeta Singh (PW-14) stated that on 18.02.2014, she was
posted as Sub Inspector in Women Cell Sidhi. On the said date, she went to
Bahri Police Station on the complaint of mother of victim, regarding the crime
related to women and in relation to rape committed by the accused Lale @
Lallu Rawat. She lodged Crime No.56/14 agaisnt the accused under Section
376, 456 of IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act. FIR is Ex.P-1. Thereafter she
recorded the statement of victim as per her version. After the statement, she
had taken the consent of victim and her mother for medical examination.
Consent is Ex.P-2. After that she prepared the medical examination form
(Ex.P-7). She was sent to District Hospital Sidhi by female Constable Sunita
Yadav. On that day, she had also recorded the statement of the victim's mother
as per her version. On 18.02.2014 after medical examination of victim, she
had received a sealed packet containing clothes of victim, a sealed packet
containing slide and a sealed packet containing sealed sample of the hospital.
On receiving these, she seized them in the presence of witnesses and prepared
seizure memo Ex.P-11. On 18.02.2014, she had also arrested the accused Lale
@ Lallu Rawat in the presence of witnesses and prepared arrest memo Ex.P-
13. After arresting the accused, for his medical examination , an examination
form Ex.P-8 was prepared and sent to District Hospital Sidhi for medical
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:15874
6 CRA-565-2016
examination by Constable Brijesh Kumar. After medical examination, on
receipt of a sealed packet from District Hospital Sidhi which contained the
underwear of accused Lale @ Lallu Rawat and a sealed packet containing a
slide and a sealed packet containing the sealed sample of the District Hospital.
Seizure memo is Ex.P-12 was prepared. Seized articles in the case was sent
by Superintendent of Police, Sidhi by letter No.-S.P./1530/14 for forensic
examination. The report received from the Forensic Science Laboratory, Sagar
is Ex.P-14.
14. P.W.-9, Dr. Smt. Bavita Khare, Medical Officer, District Hospital,
Sidhi, examined the prosecutrix on 18.02.2014. She found that the victim's
secondary sexual characteristics had not developed. There was a lacerated
wound measuring 1 cm x 1 cm on the genital region. The child was in severe
pain. Blood-stained clothes were sealed and handed over to the police. She
opined that sexual intercourse had been attempted.
15. Dr. Rajeev Dwivedi (PW-10) stated that on 18.02.2014, he was
posted as Medical Officer at the District Hospital Sidhi. On that date,
Constable No.230, Brijesh Kumar of Police Station Bahri had brought the
accused Lale Rawat @ Lallu before him for examination. As per his opinion,
the accused was found capable to sexual intercourse. He also stated that he by
extracting the semen from the accused Lale @ Lallu sent to the police station
with his clothes sealed and Constable Brijesh Kumar. His report is Ex.P-8.
16. Rajesh Kumar Prajapati (PW-11) stated that on 28.02.2014, he was
posted on the post of Patwari at Patwari Halka Pengwa Aabad. On that date,
he visited the place of incident and prepared the spot map Ex.P-9 and also
prepared the Panchnama Ex.P-10 in the presence of dignitaries people of the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:15874
7 CRA-565-2016
village and he had sent the report to Station House Officer.
17. Sunita Yadav (PW-12) stated that on 18.02.2014, she was posted as
Lady Constable at Police Station Bahri. She stated that she brought victim
aged 8 years to District Hospital Sidhi with application for medical
examination. After getting her medical examination done, a sealed packet
containing the victim's clothes salwar and panty, a sealed packet containing
the vaginal slide of the victim and a sealed sample of the District Hospital
Sidhi were produced before the Sub Inspector, Sangeeta Singh, Women Cell
Sidhi. Sub Inspector, Sangeeta seized the aforesaid articles. Seizure memo is
Ex.P-11. On 18.02.2014 from District Hospital Sidhi itself the underwear of
accused was in a sealed packet and the semen slide and the sealed sample of
District Hospital Sidhi, all the above mentioned items were in a sealed packet,
on being presented before her by Constable Brijesh Tiwari, the same were
seized by Sub Inspector Sangeeta Singh and seizure memo Ex.P-12 was
prepared.
18. Brijesh Kumar Tiwari (PW-13) stated that on 18.02.2014 he was
posted as Constable at Police Station Bahri. He deposed that on the said date,
Constable 203 of Women Cell, Sidhi had handed over a sealed packet
containing underwear of the accused Lallu Rawat, a sealed packet containing
vaginal slide of the accused and a sealed sample of the District Hospital Sidhi
to Sub-Inspector Sangeeta Singh of the Women's Cell, Sidhi, whose seizure
was made by Sangeeta Singh as Ex.P-12.
19. B.P. Tripathi (PW-15) stated that on 18.02.2014, he was posted as
Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sidhi in the Women's Cell, Sidhi. He admits
that on that date he had received the case dairy for investigation of Crime
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:15874
8 CRA-565-2016
No.56/14 under Section 376, 456 of IPC and Section 3/4 of Protection of
Children From Sexual Offences Act, at Police Station Bahri. On 18.02.2014,
he had prepared the spot map Ex.P-4 at the instance of complainant in the
presence of witnesses. On said date, he also recorded the statements of
witnesses Lalan @ Bhagirathi Rawat, Smt. Mohaniya Rawat, Sukhdev Sahu,
Lallu Sahu and Smt. Savita Rawat as per their version. On 19.02.2014, he had
visited the District Hospital, Sidhi and recorded the statement of victim in the
question-answer format. He also recorded the statements of witnesses
Sobhnath and Meena Rawat on 18.02.2014.
20. Arjun Prasad Gupta (DW-1) and Rajbahor Sahu (DW-2) were
produced by accused in defence and both witnesses are trying to establish that
the accused person was present in the program of Barhon and on that date
there was no incident happened, but both defence witnesses are not reliable
and it appears that both defence witnesses had come before the Court only at
the behest of the accused.
21. After analyzing the evidence which was produced by the
prosecution, it appears that victim (PW-1) clearly stated that on the date of
incident, in the night, accused had come to her house and took off her panty
and committed rape with her, due to which, blood was oozing from her private
part of the victim. It is also clear that after crying the victim, her sister-in-law
(Bhabhi) reached at the place of incident, appellant/accused fled away from
her house. This fact is also corroborated by Savita Rawat (PW-6). Mother of
victim (PW-2) also supported the statement of PW-1 that when she had
reached her house and had seen the victim lying in the house and victim
started to weep and told her about the incident.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:15874
9 CRA-565-2016
22. On perusal of the statement of PW-3, it also appears that when he
had seen the victim, the victim was lying in the house and victim told all the
incident to the witnesses and it is also proved by the evidence of other
witnesses like Smt. Mohaniya (PW-4) and Sobhnath Kol (PW-5) that when
they had reached the house of the victim, they had seen the victim and found
that blood was oozing out from the private part of the victim and her clothes
were stained with blood.
23. From the evidence of Smt. Babita Khare, when she medically
examined the victim, she found lacerated wound of 1x1 cm. and also cloth of
the victim was stained with blood. In cross-examination of victim (PW-1),
mother of victim (PW-2), Bhagirath Kol (PW-3) and other witnesses, nothing
was found that the victim or her mother or her family was interested to falsely
implicate to the accused person regarding any prior enmity of the incident.
24. The main argument made on behalf of the accused is that Dr.
Babita Khare (PW-9) has stated in her opinion that an attempt was made to
have sexual intercourse with victim. In such a situation, the accused cannot be
held guilty under Section 376 IPC r/w Section 3/4 of Protection of Children
from Sexual Offences Act 2012. The above argument made on behalf of the
accused cannot be accepted because Dr. Babita Khare (PW-9) in her
examination found that there was 1x1 cm. sized torn wound in the private part
of the victim and at the time of the incident, the blue panty and white salwar
were stained with blood. It is necessary to mention here that complete
penetration is not necessary to establish the element of rape. In this regard, the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satyapal vs. State of Haryana; (2009)6 SCC 635 in
para 18 of the judgment held as under:-
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:15874
10 CRA-565-2016
"18. In Modi's Medical Jurisprudence, 23rd Edn., at pp.897 and
928, it is stated:
"To constitute the offence of rape, it is not
necessary that there would be complete penetration of the
penis with the emission of semen and the rupture of
hymen. Partial penetration of the penis within the labia
majora or the vulva or pudenda, with or without the
emission of semen or even an attempt at penetration is
quite sufficient for the purpose of law. It is, therefore,
quite possible to commit legally, the offence of rape
without producing any injury to the genitals or leaving
any seminal stains. ...
* * *
In small children, the hymen is not usually
ruptured, but may become red and congested along with
the inflammation and bruising of the labia. If
considerable violence is used, there is often laceration of
the fourchette and the perineum."
25. In view of aforesaid discussion, this criminal appeal fails and is
hereby dismissed.
26. Record of the trial Court be sent back immediately.
(RATNESH CHANDRA SINGH BISEN)
(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE
JUDGE
sp/-
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:15874
11 CRA-565-2016
