1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
AT JODHPUR
J U D G M E N T
Purna Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan
D.B.CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.566/2003
against the judgment dt.10.4.03 passed by the
learned Addl.Sessions Judge, Deedwana,
in Sessions Case No.16/2002.
Date of Judgment: 4 t h May, 2009
P R E S E N T
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.KAPADIA
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DEO NARAYAN THANVI
Mr.R.K.Charan, for appellant.
Mr.S.S.Sharma, Public Prosecutor.
BY THE COURT : (PER THANVI J.)
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment
passed by the learned Addl.Sessions Judge, Deedwana
dated 10.4.2003, whereby he has convicted the accused
appellant Purna Ram of the offence u/s.366A IPC and
sentenced him to undergo seven years’ R.I. together
with a fine of Rs.500/- & in default, to further undergo
three months’ R.I. Accused Purna Ram has also been
2
convicted of the offence u/s.376 IPC and sentenced to
undergo life imprisonment together with a fine of
Rs.500/- & in default, to further undergo three months’
R.I.
2. The charge against the accused appellant Purna
Ram was that on 11.4.02, when Poonam aged 5 years,
daughter of complainant Gopal Lal, was playing outside
the house, he took her in the field and committed rape
with her and thereafter she was sent back by giving ice
cream and one & half rupee. The wife of complainant
noticed the panty of the girl Poonam being blood
stained and on being asked, she narrated the whole
incident to her mother. The report of the incident was
lodged on 16.4.02 by Gopal Lal, father of the girl, at
the Police Station, Khunkhuna. Upon this, a case under
ss.366A & 376 IPC was registered against the accused
and investigation was commenced. After investigation,
the accused appellant was chargesheeted for the
abovesaid offences. The case was committed to the
court of Sessions, where the charges were framed
accordingly against the accused, to which he pleaded
not guilty. The prosecution examined 14 witnesses. The
statement of the accused was recorded u/s.313 CrPC.
3
He led no defence. After hearing the arguments, the
learned trial Judge convicted & sentenced the accused
appellant as above.
3. The incident of rape narrated by the girl Poonam
has been brought on record by the evidence of her
father Gopal Lal PW 1, Smt.Kevki, PW 2 who is grand
mother of the prosecutrix and also by Sharda, PW 4,
her mother to whom she narrated the story. Though the
girl has not been examined by the prosecution being a
child of 5 years but the factum of rape has been
corroborated by the medical evidence of Dr.Anil Kumar
Sharma, PW 10 and also by the investigating officer
Ramdev, PW 12, when she was questioned by him.
Learned counsel for the accused appellant submits that
in this case, the prosecutrix has not been examined
being 5 years of age and if this Court finds that the
case is made out against the accused on the basis of
the evidence of her father, mother and grand mother
supported by the testimony of Dr.Anil Kumar Sharma,
PW 10 and investigating Officer Ramdev, PW 12, then
he does not want to question the legality of the
conviction and submits that he may be awarded lesser
sentence because accused appellant Purna Ram is a
4
young boy of less than 25 years of age. That apart, he
has been languishing in jail for last more than seven
years, which is minimum punishment provided under
the law.
4. It is true that in this case, the FIR has been lodged
by the delay of five days and the prosecutrix being of
the age of five years, has not been examined but from
the evidence of her father, mother and grand mother,
there does not appear to be any reason to disbelieve
their testimony, as there was no enmity or other reason
to falsely implicate the accused appellant for
committing rape with a minor girl, as held by the
learned trial Judge on the basis of the prosecution
evidence as also the medical evidence.
5. So far as the sentence part is concerned, there
also seems no special or adequate reasons to award the
lesser sentence than provided-for under the law, which
is ten years, in the case covered under Clause (f) of
sub-section (2) of Section 376 IPC. However, the
sentence of life imprisonment appears to be excessive
in view of the fact that the accused appellant being
village labourer and young boy of 24 years of age at the
5
time of commission of offence having long life to lead,
we, therefore, deem it proper that the minimum
sentence provided under Section 376(2) for committing
rape with a minor girl of less than 12 years, which is
ten years, will suffice the ends of justice.
6. Accordingly, we allow this appeal in part. While
maintaining the conviction & sentence of the accused
appellant Purna Ram of the offence u/s.366A IPC with
seven years’ R.I. alongwith a fine of Rs.500/- & in
default, to further undergo three months’ R.I. recorded
by the learned Addl.Sessions Judge Deedwana vide his
judgment dt.10.4.03, we reduce the sentence of life
imprisonment u/s.376 IPC to ten years’ R.I., which is
minimum sentence, provided under the law. However,
the amount of fine of Rs.500/- on this count is
maintained, in default of which he will further undergo
three months’ R.I. Both the substantive sentences shall
run concurrently.
(DEO NARAYAN THANVI), J. (A.M.KAPADIA), J.
RANKAWAT JK, PS