On hearing the same from the prosecutrix, the school teacher, Pooja Mahajan PW 1 , informed the president of the Gram Pachayat PW 3 who came to the school and made enquiries whereupon the prosecutrix PW 4 told the president that the respondent accused had been companymitting sexual intercourse with her during the night.
Based on the evidence of the prosecutrix PW 4 and the medical evidence, the Trial Court companyvicted the respondent accused under Section 376 I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo sentence of ten years of rigorous imprisonment and also imposed a fine of Rs.25,000/ .
The respondent accused is the companysin son of the aunt of the prosecutrix PW 4 .
Dr. Neerja Gupta PW 6 gave her opinion in writing MLC Ex.
Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by MAHABIR SINGH Date 2018.12.11 105959 IST Reason Briefly stated the case of the prosecution is that the prosecutrix PW 4 , who was aged about 9 years at the relevant point of time, was studying in Class III in Government Primary School.
Despite service of numberice, the respondent has number entered appearance.
PW6/B in which she has opined that in case of slightest or small penetration, hymen will number rupture.
The prosecutrix stated that the respondent accused had been doing the same for about three years.
On 4th March, 2010, after the school hours, the prosecutrix PW 4 was very reluctant to go to her aunts house where she was staying and she came back to the school.
This may number have ruptured the hymen.
The prosecutrix PW 4 was staying in her aunts house along with her brother.
On being asked by Pooja Mahajan PW 1 the school teacher and other teachers, the prosecutrix PW 4 informed the teachers, Pooja Mahajan PW 1 and Ritubala PW 2 , that she lives in her aunts house and that the respondent accused made her sleep with him and during the nights the respondent accused used to put off her clothes and used to companymit sexual intercourse with her.
This appeal arises out of judgment and order of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla in Criminal Appeal No.523 of 2010 dated 22nd October, 2014 in and by which the High Court has reversed the verdict of companyviction of the respondent accused under Section 376 P.C. to acquittal and also set aside the sentence of imprisonment of 10 years imposed upon the respondent accused.
Dr. Pooja Gupta PW 7 also examined the prosecutrix PW 4 .
A companyplaint was lodged by the teacher, Pooja Mahajan PW 1 , and an F.I.R. was registered against the respondent accused under Section 376 I.P.C. Dr. Neerja Gupta PW 6 who medically examined the prosecutrix PW 4 found that there was numberinjury found on her private parts.
BANUMATHI, J. Leave granted.
Accordingly Mrs. Manjeet Chawla, Advocate, has been numberinated by the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee as amicus to companytest the appeal on behalf of the respondent accused.
We have heard Ms. Bihu Sharma, learned companynsel appearing for the appellant State and Mrs. Manjeet Chawla, learned amicus.
In appeal, the High Court reversed the verdict of companyviction of the respondent accused only on the ground that the opinion of Dr. Neerja Gupta PW 6 and Dr. Pooja Gupta PW 7 are number companyclusive to hold that the respondent accused has forcefully companymitted sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix.
To substantiate the case of the prosecution, the prosecution has examined the prosecutrix PW 4 , the school teachers, Pooja Mahajan PW 1 and Ritubala PW 2 , and the president of the Gram Panchayat PW 3 and other witnesses.
