SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Jugal @ Audhad Baba vs State Of M.P. on 21 June, 2018

1 Cr. Appeal No.906/2008


Cr. Appeal No.906 of 2008

Jugal @ Oghad Baba
State of Madhya Pradesh

Hon’ble Justice Rohit Arya

Hon’ble Justice S.K.Awasthi

Shri Yogesh Purohit, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Mukesh Parwal, learned Public Prosecutor for the

Reserved on: 05/05/2018


Per Rohit Arya, J.,

This appeal by an accused under section 374 Cr.P.C., is
directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence
dated 11/06/2008 passed in sessions trial No.376/2006 by I
Additional Sessions Judge, Mhow, District Indore, convicting the
appellant under section 376 IPC and sentenced to suffer ten years
rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.2,000/- in default of payment
of fine to undergo six months additional imprisonment. Further,
under section 302 IPC and sentenced to suffer life imprisonment
with fine of Rs.3,000/-.

2. The prosecution story, in brief is that on 26/07/2006,
information was received at the Police Station on telephone that in
the village Sutarkhedi, Sitanagar Colony, Ringhroad, a woman
(Roshini, since dead) was found having injuries on the body in an
unconscious condition. On the basis of said information,
Roznamcha was entered at No.1378 on 26.7.2006 and Assistant
Sub Inspector D.R.Vaskale reached the spot. Thereafter, the injured
was sent to the Civil Hospital, Mhow for treatment. After primary
medication, due to the serious condition, the injured was referred to
M.Y.Hospital, Indore. She died on 27.7.2006 at 12.37 pm during
treatment. Thereafter, at Police Station Samyogitaganj, marg under
2 Cr. Appeal No.906/2008

section 174 Cr.P.C was registered at crime No.286/2006. and then,
original marg under section 174 Cr.P.C., was registered at crime
No.39/06 by Police Station Kishanganj and the investigation set in

During the investigation, it surfaced that in the night of
26/07/2006, the accused Jugal alias Ohdadbaba resident of village
Giroda has committed rape upon the deceased and thereafter
caused injuries on her private part with hard and blunt object as a
result she died in the intervening night of 27 th/28th July, 2006 at
12.37 pm. Vide exhibits P/2 P/3 various items were seized, Spot
panchnama was prepared (exhibit P/6), Spot map was prepared
(exhibit P/7), naksha panchayatnama was prepared (exhibit P/17),
seized the danda (exhibit P/18). The dead body was sent for post
mortem. The post mortem report is exhibit P/15. The accused was
arrested and prepared arrest memo (exhibit P/5). All the seized
articles were sent for FSL examination. On completion of the
investigation, a charge sheet was filed against the accused before
the concerned Court.

3. Dr. Bharat Vajpai (P.W.14) has conducted post mortem
(exhibit P/15). He has assessed the age of deceased as 23 years
and found the injuries; (i) abrasion ½ x ½ cm over left anterolaterlal
knee; (ii) abrasion 5 x 3 cm over right anterior knee; (iii) two
abrasions 12 x ½ cm over left lateral post mid thigh 1.5 cm apart;

(iv) three abrasions 1 x 1/8 cm over left upper posterolateral arm; (v)
one abrasion ½ x ½ cm over left posterior upper forearm; (vi) three
abrasions 12 x ½ cm over right posterior lateral mid upper gluteal
region; (vii) abrasion 8 x ½ cm over left loin above iliac crest
posterior aspect; (viii) lacerated wound ½ x ¼ x ¼ cm over left mid
lateral planter foot; (ix) right side labia majora shows contused
swelling over mid and upper part 6 x 3 cm, on right side para
urethral tear 3 x ½ x ½ cm, on left side para urethral tear 3 x ½ x ½
cm (not clear) on right side vagina wall posterolateral tear 3 x 1 cm
wall deep. Lower Vulva (not clear) shows cuticle tear 1.5 x 1 cm.
Right side moris pubic area shows ecchymosis 6 x 4 cm area
subcutaneously inner anterolateral lower costal abdomen wall
ecchymosed 8 x 6 cm between muscle. R anterior and
anterolateral lower costal inner tissues are ecchymosed 10 x 8 cm
distantly on left side on postolateral vaginal wall tear 2.5 x ½ x ¼ cm
is present. Reddish fluix oozing slightly from vagina.

3 Cr. Appeal No.906/2008

All the injuries are caused by hard and blunt object and
shows read colour of ecchymosis and are within 24 hours prior to
death and opined that death was caused due to shock
haemorrhage. Evidence of internal and external genital organ
present. Viscera, tissues, vaginal and swab slides, clothings and
pubic hair are present for examination. As such, deceased had
suffered death within 24 hours since examination.

4. The prosecution has examined as many as 19 witnesses and
placed Exhibits P/1 to P/22, the documents on record. The accused
has not examined any witness in his defence.

5. The trial Judge on the basis of the material placed on
record framed charge punishable under Sections 376 IPC and 302
IPC against the accused/appellant. The accused denied the charge
and claimed to be tried. The defence of the accused is of false
implication and the same defence set forth in his statement
recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,

6. The Trial Judge while carefully examining the evidence of
sole eye-witness, Ambaram (P.W.5) read with evidence of
witnesses; Manjubai (P.W.6) and Shailendra (P.W.7) has found
that there is consistency in their statements that the deceased was
last seen with the accused/appellant and sexually assaulted the
deceased. On the basis of overwhelming evidence of occurrence of
the incident and involvement of the accused/appellant coupled with
the corroborative medical evidence, i.e.,, post mortem report (exhibit
P/15) and the evidence of Dr. Savita Joshi (P.W.1) who has initially
treated the deceased before whom the deceased had disclosed that
rape was committed upon her, Dr. Nilesh Dalal (P.W.12) as well as
the obtaining circumstances, the trial Court has concluded that the
accused/appellant has established physical relationship and
sexually exploited against her wish and thereafter, caused grievous
injuries with a danda (stick) on various parts of her body including
that of private part and due to which, she died. Accordingly, held
that charge under Sections 376 IPC and 302 IPC have been
proved against the accused/appellant as a result of which he has
been convicted and passed the sentence as mentioned
4 Cr. Appeal No.906/2008

7. Learned counsel for the appellant while criticizing the
impugned judgment contends that there is mis-appreciation of the
evidence on record and committed grave illegality having relied
upon the testimony of the evidence led by cited witnesses including
the alleged sole eye-witness, Ambaram (P.W.5) read with evidence
of Manjubai (P.W.6), Shailendra (P.W.7), the medical evidence led
by Dr. Savita Joshi (P.W.1), Dr. Nilesh Dalal (P.W.12) and Dr.
Bharat Vajpai (P.W.14). According to the learned counsel, since
the commission of offence by the appellant has not been proved by
the prosecution and further there was no cogent evidence to
establish the ingredients of offence under Sections 376 IPC and
302 IPC, therefore, the trial Court erred in convicting the appellant,
hence, the appeal be allowed and the appellant be acquitted from
the charge.

8. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has supported the
impugned judgment and finding arrived at by the trial Court and
submitted that the conviction in question is well merited.

9. Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that
Ambaram (P.W.5) who is alleged to be eye-witness of the incident
has accepted in his cross-examination that at the time of incident,
the conduct of the prosecutrix was shown that she was a consenting
party. But, we do not find any merit in the contention looking to the
external and internal injuries sustained by the prosecutrix. Hence,
looking to the impeccable testimony of the eye-witnesses as last
seen the deceased with the appellant and further the medical
evidence referred to above, according to us, the Trial Court did not
commit any error in holding that the deceased had died on account
of committing rape and causing grievous injuries on various parts of
her body including that of the private part by the accused/appellant.

10. The argument canvassed by the learned counsel for the
appellant that no motive has been attributed to the appellant for
committing sexual assault and causing the grievous injuries and
ultimate death of the deceased appears to be attractive but, of no
assistance to the appellant. Thus, the argument that the appellant
cannot be convicted for the offence under sections 376 IPC and 302
IPC is totally misconceived for the reason that it was established on
5 Cr. Appeal No.906/2008

record that the appellant was with the deceased before commission
of the alleged offence. The said fact has been established from the
statement of the eye-witnesses, Amabram (P.W.5), Manjubai
(P.W.6) and Shailendra (P.W.7). The causing of death of the
deceased; a 23 years old girl after sexual assault and thereafter by
inflicting grievous injuries on various parts of her body including that
of private part; an unnatural conduct of the appellant completes the
chain of circumstances and no interference is warranted in the
impugned judgment. Hence, the argument is rejected, accordingly.

11. The judgment is based on correct appreciation of the
evidence based on record and we do not want to deviate ourselves
from the reasonings assigned by the Trial Court. Hence, we extend
our stamp of approval of the reasonings, findings, conviction and
sentence recorded and awarded by the Trial Court.

12. Ex consequentia, this appeal is found to be bereft of any

substance and the same is hereby dismissed.

(Rohit Arya) (S.K.Awasthi)
Judge Judge
21 -06-2018 21-06-2018

Digitally signed by M V R BALAJI
Date: 2018.06.21 16:06:26 +05’30’

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation