(Arun Mishra and Indira Banerjee, JJ.)
Rakesh Kumar Yadav ______________________________ Appellant;
v.
State of Chhattisgarh _____________________________ Respondent.
Criminal Appeal No. 333 of 2020 [@ Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 3249 of 2019], decided on February 18, 2020
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal arises out of the impugned Judgment and Order dated 28.11.2018 passed by the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur in Criminal Appeal No. 550 of 2009, whereby the High Court has affirmed the order of conviction of the appellant passed by the trial court under Sections 376(1) and 450 IPC.
3. The brief facts of the case are as follows:—
4. On 22.03.2008, when the prosecutrix was staying in her house with her daughter, the appellant – Rakesh Kumar Yadav forcibly entered into her house and committed sexual assault on her. On hearing her screams, her daughter came to rescue when the appellant threatened her of life. When the husband of the victim came to the house, the accused fled away from the spot.
5. An FIR was registered at the instance of the prosecutrix under Sections 376, 450 and 506-B IPC and Sections 3(1)(12) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. As many as eleven witnesses were examined by the prosecution and five witnesses were examined by the accused in his defence. The medical examination of the prosecutrix proved the incident of rape.
6. The Sessions Court, on hearing the parties, though acquitted the appellant for the offence under Section 3(1()(12) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, but sentenced him under Section 450 IPC for three years rigorous imprisonment and for five years under Section 376(1) IPC. By way of impugned Judgment and Order dated 28.11.2018, the High Court has affirmed the sentence imposed by the trial Court.
7. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties at length. In view of the statements of PW-3 (the prosecutrix), PW-1 (Amritlal – husband) and PW2 – the daughter of the victim, the affidavit filed by the prosecutrix in this Court stating that she had lodged the case against the appellant under pressure, cannot be relied upon. Hence, we find no ground to interfere with the impugned Judgment and order passed by the High Court. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 3249/2019
Rakesh Kumar Yadav _______________________________ Petitioner
v.
The State of Chhattisgarh __________________________ Respondent
(FOR ADMISSION AND I.R.)
(IA No. 50402/2019 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.
IA No. 50398/2019 – PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)
Date: 18-02-2020 This matter was called on for hearing today.
(Before Arun Mishra and Indira Banerjee, JJ.)
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vikrant Singh Bais, AOR
Mr. Yogesh Tiwari, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Muhammad Ali Khan, AAG
Mr. Nishanth Patil, AOR
Mr. Omar Hoda, Adv.
Mr. Kamran Khan, Adv.
Mr. Imroz Alam, Adv.
Mr. Chirag Jain, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
ORDER
8. Leave granted.
9. The appeal is dismissed in terms of the signed order.
10. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, is/are disposed of.
———
