Panchu vs State
2022 Latest Caselaw 6230 Raj/2

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

                   S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 69/1987

Panchu S/o Sh. Sugna, Aged 30 Years, R/o Gram Sarana, Police
Station Sarwad, District Ajmer. Presently Central Jail, Ajmer
                                                                   ----Appellant
                                    Versus
State of Rajasthan
                                                                 ----Respondent

For Appellant(s)           :    Mr. B. N. Sandhu, Adv.
                                Mr. Parth Sarthi Sandu, Adv.
                                Mr. Fouji Chawla, Adv.
For Respondent(s)          :    Mr. Atul Sharma, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA

Order

16/09/2022

Appellant has filed the appeal challenging the judgment &

order dated 07.01.1987 passed by Sessions Judge, Ajmer in

Sessions Case No.87/1986, whereby appellant was convicted and

sentenced for the offence(s) punishable under Section 376 IPC for

7 years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.100/-; in default of

payment thereof, to further undergo one month additional

imprisonment.

Prosecution story, in brief, is that prosecutrix on 08.06.1986

was grazing her goats. At that time, appellant was also grazing

goats and caught the prosecutrix and raped her. Then, prosecutrix

went to her house and told whole history to her mother and her

father was at Ajmer. After that, he came and FIR was lodged.

(2 of 4) [CRLA-69/1987]

After completion of investigation and necessary formalities,

challan was presented against the appellant.

Charges were framed against the appellant under Section

376 IPC and prosecution examined 09 witnesses to prove its case.

Appellant was examined under Section 313 Code of Criminal

Procedure, 1973 prayed that he was innocent and falsely

implicated in this case and had not produced any defence

evidence.

Trial court vide judgment and order dated 07.01.1987,

ordered the conviction and sentence of the appellant under

Section 376 IPC. Hence, the present appeal by the appellant.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the trial

court had erred in ordering the conviction and sentence of the

appellant and also submitted that trial court had not read the

prosecution evidence in right perspective. Learned counsel for the

appellant also submitted that present FIR was lodged after a delay

of 2 days and also submitted that prosecutrix had not received

any injury on her private parts, so, it could not be said that she

was raped. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that

there was a land dispute between father of the prosecutrix and

grand-father of the appellant, so, present FIR was lodged to settle

the land dispute. Learned counsel for the appellant also submitted

that no semen was detected on Ghagra of the prosecutrix. So, the

appellant be acquitted. Alternatively, learned counsel for the

appellant also submitted that appellant is facing trauma of trial

since 1987. He remained in custody for more than one year. So, if

Court comes to the conclusion for confirmation of conviction, then,

(3 of 4) [CRLA-69/1987]

reduce the sentence awarded by the trial court for the period of

imprisonment already undergone.

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the arguments

advanced by learned counsel for the appellant.

I have considered the arguments advanced by learned

counsel for the appellant as well as learned Public Prosecutor.

After perusing the judgment of learned trial court and

considering the evidence recorded by the trial court, I do not see

any legal or other grounds to interfere with the findings of the trial

court.

Admittedly, FIR was lodged on 09.06.1986 and out of the

total sentence of 7 years awarded to the accused appellant, he

has remained in custody near about one year and since then he is

facing mental trauma.

After considering the submission of learned counsel for the

appellant, I deem it just and proper to reduce the sentence of

imprisonment awarded to the appellant from seven years rigorous

imprisonment to the period of imprisonment already undergone by

the appellant in confinement.

This criminal appeal is accordingly partly allowed. It is

ordered that the sentence of imprisonment passed by the trial

court is reduced from seven years rigorous imprisonment to the

period of imprisonment already undergone by the appellant in

confinement but the amount of fine shall remain unchanged. The

accused-appellant shall deposit the fine amount awarded by the

trial court within one month from today.

In view of the provisions of Section 437-A Cr.P.C., appellant

namely Panchu S/o Sh. Sugna is directed to furnish a personal

(4 of 4) [CRLA-69/1987]

bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/-, and a surety in the like amount,

before the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court, which shall be

effective for a period of six months, with stipulation that in the

event of Special Leave Petition being filed against the judgment or

on grant of leave, the appellant aforesaid, on receipt of notice

thereof, shall appear before the Supreme Court.

(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J

Jatin/01

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)