1. Challenge in this appeal is to a judgment dated 12.09.2006 of learned Addl. Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.181/2006 arising out of FIR No.191/03 by which the appellant - Sanjay Kumar was convicted for committing offences punishable under Sections 376/448 IPC. By an order dated 21.09.2006, he was sentenced to undergo RI for seven years with fine `1,000/- under Section 376 IPC and RI for six months with fine `500 under Section 448 IPC. Both the sentences were to operate concurrently. Crl.A.No.914/2006 Page 1 of 8
2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case as projected in the charge-sheet was that on 25.02.2003 at 02.00 pm after committing house trespass at D4/363, Sultanpuri, the appellant committed rape upon the prosecutrix 'X' (assumed name) aged around 27 years. She was criminally intimidated and robbed of her jewellery articles and cash `9,000/-. Police machinery came into motion on receiving information about the incident at 02.55 pm on 25.02.2003 and DD No.58B (Ex.PW-7/A) came into existence at PS Sultanpuri. The investigation was assigned to ASI Kaptan Singh who with Const.Parminder went to the spot. After recording victim's statement (PW-8/A), he lodged First Information Report. The prosecutrix was medically examined; she recorded her 164 Cr.P.C. statement. The accused was arrested and taken for medical examination. Statements of the witnesses conversant with the facts were recorded. Exhibits collected during investigation were sent for examination to Forensic Science Laboratory. Upon completion of investigation, a charge- sheet was filed against the appellant for offences under Sections 323/376/380/506/397/452 IPC. By an order dated 07.02.2004, the appellant was charged for committing offences under Sections 448/377/376/323/380/506 part-II IPC to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. To establish its case, prosecution examined fifteen Crl.A.No.914/2006 Page 2 of 8 witnesses. In 313 Cr.P.C. statement, the appellant pleaded false implication and denied complicity in the crime. He did not produce any evidence in defence. On appreciation of the evidence and after considering the rival contentions of the parties, the Trial Court, by the impugned judgment held the appellant guilty for committing offence under Sections 376/448 IPC. It is apt to note that the appellant was acquitted of the charges under Sections 380/506 part-II/ 377 IPC. State did not challenge the said acquittal.