Madhya Pradesh High Court
Puja vs Akash on 9 September, 2015
1
Criminal Appeal No.354/2015
09.09.2015
Smt. Rukmani Dhangar, learned counsel for the
appellant.
Shri Manoj Jain, learned counsel for respondents No.1
to 5.
Shri Deepak Rawal, learned Public Prosecutor for respondent No.6 / State.
Heard on IA No.1763/2015, an application for condonation of delay.
Appeal against acquittal is barred by 21 days. For the reasons assigned in the application, we condone the delay of 21 days in filing the present criminal appeal.
Accordingly, IA No.1763/2015 is allowed. Heard on the question of admission.
This criminal appeal has been filed by the prosecutrix / complainant against the judgment of acquittal dated 06.12.2014 passed in Sessions Trial No.37/2014, whereby respondents No.1 to 5 have been acquitted by the learned Trial Court for alleged offence under Sections 363, 366, 342, 506 Part-II of the Indian Panel Code, 1860 and respondent No.1 Akash s/o Suresh Satloni has also been acquitted for alleged offence under Sections 376 (2) and 375 (d) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Sections 3 (d) / 4 and 5 2 (B) Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012.
Allegation against respondent No.1 Akash is that on 04.12.2012, he abducted the prosecutrix from her home and thereafter committed rape upon her. As per her date of birth (29.06.1995), on the date of occurrence, she was below 18 years of age. It is also submitted that when the prosecutrix was recovered at that time, she was above 18 years of age, but she was having six months pregnancy, and therefore, as she was along with respondent No.1 Akash and his family members, and therefore, it is respondent No.1 Akash, who committed the alleged offence. Statement of Teacher of the School has been disbelieved by the learned trial Court. Prosecutrix (PW-2) in paragraph No.9 of her statement has very categorically admitted that up to 01.08.2013, she was at her maternal uncle's place.
In view of the aforesaid admission of the prosecutrix, admittedly, offence, if any, committed under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 has been committed by respondent No.1 Akash after 01.08.2013. If we go through the statement of the prosecutrix (PW-2), it is a case of consent at the relevant point of time, the prosecutrix was major and thereafter, her marriage was solemnized with respondent No.1 Akash.
On due consideration of the aforesaid and admissions 3 made by the prosecutrix in her Court statement / cross examination, learned trial Court acquitted respondents No.1 to 5 from the alleged offence.
Learned counsel for the appellant has drawn our attention to the reasonings assigned by the learned trial Court as well as the statement of the prosecutrix and submitted that at the time of occurrence, the prosecutrix was minor and this aspect has not been considered by the learned trial Court, while acquitting respondents No.1 to 5.
We have analyzed the statement of the prosecutrix. In view of clear admission made by the prosecutrix in her cross examination, we are of the view that the learned trial Court has rightly acquitted respondents No.1 to 5 from the alleged offence. No case to interfere with the well reasoned findings recorded by the trial Court, as prayed for, is made out.
Criminal Appeal No.354/2015 has no merit and is accordingly dismissed.
(P.K. Jaiswal) (D.K. Paliwal)
Judge Judge
Pithawe RC