Mohd. Ghouse, vs The State Of Ap Rep By Its Pp Hyd.,
2022 Latest Caselaw 5510 Tel

           HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

            CRIMINAL APPEAL No.705 OF 2010
JUDGMENT:

1. This Criminal Appeal is filed by the Appellant/Accused

aggrieved by the conviction recorded by the III Additional

Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, in S.C.No.104 of

2009, dated 19.05.2010, convicting the accused for the

offence punishable under Sections 363 and 376 of the Indian

Penal Code; and sentence of Rigorous Imprisonment for a

period of three years and a fine of Rs.5,000/-.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the appellant took

PW2 who was aged around 14 years to Delhi and stayed there

for about 15 days and she was brought back and she joined

her parents.

3. On the basis of the complaint given by the brother of the

victim girl that her sister was missing, the police registered a

crime on 31.10.2006. On 21.11.2006 it was informed that the

victim girl had returned home. During the course of

investigation it was found that the appellant herein developed

intimacy with PW2 and also took her to Delhi where they

stayed in a lodge for 15 days and the appellant had sexual

intercourse with PW2.

4. The Medical evidence would go to show that PW2 was

leading conjugal life. The Doctor (PW3) who examined victim

girl stated that there were injuries on the genital parts and

also there were old tears of hymen, however, PW3 concluded

that she cannot conclusively state about there being any

recent rape.

5. The prosecution had produced Ex.P8 which is certificate

of birth issued by the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad,

wherein the age of PW2 is shown as 21.04.1992. The alleged

incident has taken place in the month of October, 2006, by

which date, the victim girl was aged about 14 years. The

victim girl (PW2) when examined, specifically stated that she

was taken to Delhi where the accused had intercourse with

her, several times. Though there is an admission by PW2 that

she was friendly with accused and acquainted, the same

would not help the appellant, since the victim girl (PW2) was

aged around 14 years. Though the defence of the accused is

one of having consensual sex, since PW2 was aged around 14

years, consent is of no consequence.

6. For the aforesaid reasons, there are no grounds to

interfere with the order of conviction of the learned Sessions

Judge.

7. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed. The

concerned Court is directed to cause appearance of the

appellant herein and send him to prison to serve out the

remaining part of the sentence.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any,

shall stand closed.

_________________ K.SURENDER, J

Date:31.10.2022 tk

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

CRIMINAL APPEAL No.705 OF 2010

Dated: 31.10.2022

tk