# Ravindra Kumar v. State Of U.P

- **Citation:** (2016) 5 ILRA 560
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2016-05-18
- **Bench:** Mrs. Ranjana Pandya
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/ravindra-kumar-v-state-of-u-p-43874
- **Pages:** 11

## Headnote

Accused appellant has challenged the judgment and order dated 20.01.2014 passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 2, Baghpat in ST No. 20 of 2011(State Vs. Ravindra) arising out of Crime
No. 479 of 2010 under Section 376(2)(g) IPC, Police Station Doghat, District Baghpat whereby the accused
appellant was found guilty and sentenced to 10 years' rigorous imprisonment and Rs.15,000/- fine under
Section 376(2)(g) IPC with default stipulation.

The minimum sentence which could be imposed under Section 376 (2) (g) is ten years. The Court
imposed the minimum sentence keeping in view the manner in which rape was committed in a ghastly and
brutal way and how the life and soul of the victim and her family was shattered, I do not find it to be a fit
case in which sentence can be reduced from the minimum sentence awarded by the Trial Court.
5 All. Ravindra Kumar Vs State Of U.P.

561
There is no force in the appeal. Hence, it is dismissed.

Held: Para-

Case Law discussed:
(2010) 8 SCC 191, Vijay @ Chinee Vs. State of M.P.,
State of Punjab Vs. Ramdev Singh, AIR 2004 SC 1290,
(2015) 4 SCC 762 Deepak Vs. State of Haryana,
Banti Alias Balvinder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 1992,

## Text

560 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
(iv) Section 245(2) Cr.P.C is a stage before the evidence of the prosecution under
Section 244(1) is completed or any stage prior to that; such stages would be under Section 200
Cr.P.C to Section 204 Cr.P.C, because the next stage is only the appearance of the accused before
the Magistrate in a warrant case under Section 244 Cr.P.C;

(v) The Magistrate can take decision under Section 245(2) before the accused is
brought before the Court or before the evidence is led under Section 244 Cr.P.C. There is no
question of consideration of evidence at that stage as there is none.

22. Having considered the statement of law, at the stage of section 245(2) Cr.P.C, only
prima facie case is to be seen as it is the stage before evidence of prosecution under Section 244 is
led. Bare perusal of the statement under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C would prima facie, disclose
the ingredients of offence against the revisionist. The learned counsel for the revisionist failed to
point out any illegality or jurisdictional error.

23. The revision being devoid of merit is accordingly dismissed.
----------
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 18.5.2016

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MRS. RANJANA PANDYA, J.

Criminal Appeal No.- 1173 Of 2014

Ravindra Kumar ...Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. ...Respondent

Counsel for the Appellant:
R.P. Singh, A.M. Tripathi, S.K. Nigam

Counsel for the Respondent:
Govt. Advocate, Ram Raj Pandey

Accused appellant has challenged the judgment and order dated 20.01.2014 passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 2, Baghpat in ST No. 20 of 2011(State Vs. Ravindra) arising out of Crime
No. 479 of 2010 under Section 376(2)(g) IPC, Police Station Doghat, District Baghpat whereby the accused
appellant was found guilty and sentenced to 10 years' rigorous imprisonment and Rs.15,000/- fine under
Section 376(2)(g) IPC with default stipulation.

The minimum sentence which could be imposed under Section 376 (2) (g) is ten years. The Court
imposed the minimum sentence keeping in view the manner in which rape was committed in a ghastly and
brutal way and how the life and soul of the victim and her family was shattered, I do not find it to be a fit
case in which sentence can be reduced from the minimum sentence awarded by the Trial Court.
5 All. Ravindra Kumar Vs State Of U.P.

561
There is no force in the appeal. Hence, it is dismissed.

Held: Para-

Case Law discussed:
(2010) 8 SCC 191, Vijay @ Chinee Vs. State of M.P.,
State of Punjab Vs. Ramdev Singh, AIR 2004 SC 1290,
(2015) 4 SCC 762 Deepak Vs. State of Haryana,
Banti Alias Balvinder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 1992,

(Delivered by Hon'ble Mrs. Ranjana Pandya, J.)

1. Accused appellant has challenged the judgment and order dated 20.01.2014 passed by
the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 2, Baghpat in ST No. 20 of 2011(State Vs.
Ravindra) arising out of Crime No. 479 of 2010 under Section 376(2)(g) IPC, Police Station
Doghat, District Baghpat whereby the accused appellant was found guilty and sentenced to 10
years' rigorous imprisonment and Rs.15,000/- fine under Section 376(2)(g) IPC with default
stipulation.

2. Filtering out the unnecessary details, the case of prosecution is that the daughter of
informant was a student of Janta Inter College, Palri. On 23.09.2010, she was not feeling well,
hence she went to take medicine. As soon as she reached near the tube well of Rajendra at about
10:30 AM, Ankit and Ravindra were standing there. Ravindra caught the hand of victim and Ankit
pushed her from behind. Ravindra took the girl towards the sugarcane filed and raped her. The
victim raised hue and cry at which Mukesh and Mangey reached on the spot. They saw Ankit
standing outside, while Ravindra was raping the victim. Seeing these witnesses both fled away
from the spot. Mukesh informed about the occurrence to the informant telephonically. The girl was
brought to the police station for lodging the first information report.

3. The prosecution examined four witnesses. PW-1 is Dharm Pal, who proved the written
report as Ext. Ka-1. PW-2 is the victim. PW-3 is Doctor Neera Panwar. On that day, the victim was
referred to the doctor for medical examination, but she was treated and examined in the private
hospital. Hence, the family members of the victim were not willing to get the victim examined. She
was referred to Higher Centre PL Sharma Hospital (Female). This witness proved the reference as
Ext. Ka-2. PW-4 is SI Ramji Lal. He copied the written report in the case diary. Further, he
recorded the statements of the Chik Writer, informant Dharam Pal, inspected the spot at the
pointing out of the informant, which was proved by this witness as Ext. Ka-3. On 24.09.2010, the
accused were arrested. Their statements were recorded. On 26.09.2010, the report of victim was
received, which was copied in case diary. The clothes of victim were taken in custody. Statement of
the victim was recorded in the case diary on 23.12.2010. The articles were sent for Forensic Lab
Examination. Investigation ended into a charge sheet, which was proved by this witness as Ext. Ka4. Chik was scribed by the Constable Dharam Veer Singh, which was proved by this witness as
Ext. Ka-5 and copy of the GD was proved as Ext. Ka-6. PW-5 is doctor Amita Singh, who treated
the victim just after the occurrence. She was brought by Home-Guard Kuldeep and Ram Naresh
562 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Tomar and Bhupendra Singh. This witness submitted the original papers regarding the treatment of
the victim. This witness stated that the victim was not in a position to talk, her pulse was not
traceable and her blood-pressure was not recordable. This witness found a perineal and vaginal
tear, which was stitched. Further, this witness stated that there was excessive bleeding from the
vagina of the victim. Hymen was torn, which was freshly torn at 6 o'clock position. In the inner
side of vagina towards the post vaginal wall there was a big lacerated wound in the vagina, which
was extending from mid-line to lateral vaginal wall on both sides. The bleeding was controlled and
the wound was stitched. She was given necessary medical treatment. Her clothes and slides were
handed over to the Constable. There were chances that the victim would have been forcibly raped.
The victim was taken back by her attendants on the ground that she would be got treated at
Baghpat. She was aged about 16 years. This witness proved the report as Ext. Ka-7.

4. After examining five witnesses, the prosecution closed its evidence. The statement of
accused was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., who denied the occurrence and stated that he had
been falsely implicated. The accused did not adduce any evidence in defence.

5. I have heard, learned counsel for appellant, learned AGA for the State and perused the
record of the case.

6. After hearing the counsel for the parties, the learned Trial Court proceeded to convict
and sentence the accused appellant as narrated in para -1 of the judgment.

7. The learned counsel for the accused appellant contended that the impugned judgment
and order passed by the learned Trial Court is based on conjecture and surmises and is liable to be
quashed by this Court. On the contrary, learned AGA supported the judgment and order under
appeal and submitted that there is no illegality, infirmity or impropriety in the impugned judgment
and the appeal deserves to be dismissed.

8. Accused Ankit was declared a juvenile on the date of occurrence. Hence, his case was
separated from that of the present accused appellant.

9. As far as the first information report is concerned, it is prompt and a prompt FIR leaves
lesser chances of embellishment and exaggeration in the prosecution case.

10. The occurrence took place on 23.09.2010 at about 10:30 AM, whereas the report was
lodged on the same day at 11:30 AM. The distance of police station from the place of occurrence is
12 kilometers. Hence, there is no delay in lodging the first information report.

11. A perusal of the copy of GD is also relevant because in the copy of the GD, which is
marked as Ext. Ka-6, shows that the victim reached the police station along with her family
members. Since she was bleeding profusely and her life had to be saved, hence she was sent to
Baraut instantly for medical aid. Thus, it is evident that when the victim went to the police station,
5 All. Ravindra Kumar Vs State Of U.P.

563
she was bleeding profusely. Thus, the first information report is prompt and there are remote
chances of false implication and embellishment.

12. A lot of stress has been given about age of the victim to show that she was a major. The
accused has not come up with the case that the victim was a consenting party. If it is proved that
she was raped without her consent, the age will not come into picture, specifically if her consent is
not proved. PW-1 is not an eye witness to the incident. But he has stated that Ravindra caught
hands of his daughter. Ankit pushed her from behind. Ankit stood on guard where Ravindra raped
his daughter. It is admitted that Ravindra is brother-in-law (Dewar) of the daughter of informant's
brother. Hence, the parties were not unknown to each other. A lot of fishing cross-examination was
done to try to indicate that the girl was not going to school and she willingly went away with the
accused appellant. This did not find favour with the Court because even for the sake of argument it
is presumed that she was not going to school even then if rape is proved, the other factors have no
bearing on the case. The informant has stated that the victim was sick from 20-25 days. He has
further stated that from the place of incident, they all went to the police station. He was
accompanied by the victim and his wife. It has also come on record that co-accused Ankit is cousin
of Ravindra. Even if it is the case of prosecution that the victim was going for taking medicine, if
the victim had to make a false case, she could very easily have stated that she was going to school
when she was raped.

13. The statement of victim is very important in a case of rape. If the statement of the
victim is reliable and worthy of credence, conviction can be based on the sole testimony of the
victim.

14. It is well settled law that the Courts must while evaluating the evidence remain alive to
the fact that in a case of rape no self-respecting woman would come forward in Court just to make
a humiliating statement against her honour such as is involved in the commission of her rape. In
cases involving sexual molestation, supposed considerations which have no material effect on the
veracity of the prosecution case or even discrepancies in the statement of the prosecutrix should
not, unless the discrepancies are such which are of fatal nature, be allowed to throw out an
otherwise reliable prosecution case. Seeking corroboration of her statement before relying upon the
same, as a rule, in such cases amounts to adding insult to injury. Corroboration as a condition for
judicial reliance on the testimony of the prosecutrix is not a requirement of law but a guidance of
prudence under given circumstances.

15. In (2010) 8 SCC 191, Vijay @ Chinee Vs. State of M.P. the Apex Court has observed
thus:

"The courts should examine the broader probabilities of a case and not get swayed
by minor contradictions or insignificant discrepancies in the statement of the prosecutrix, which
are not of a fatal nature, to throw out an otherwise reliable prosecution case. If evidence of the
prosecutrix inspires confidence, it must be relied upon without seeking corroboration of her
statement in material particulars. If for some reason the court finds it difficult to place implicit
564 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
reliance on her testimony, it may look for evidence which may lend assurance to her testimony,
short of corroboration required in the case of an accomplice. The testimony of the prosecutrix must
be appreciated in the background of the entire case and the trial court must be alive to its
responsibility and be sensitive while dealing with cases involving sexual molestations."

16. In the case of State of Punjab Vs. Ramdev Singh, AIR 2004 SC 1290 the Apex Court
as observed as under:

"Sexual violence apart from being a dehumanizing act is an unlawful intrusion on
the right of privacy and sanctity of a female. It is a serious blow to her supreme honour and offends
her self-esteem and dignity it degrades and humiliates the victim and where the victim is a helpless
innocent child or a minor, it leaves behind a traumatic experience. A rapist not only causes
physical injuries but more indelibly leaves a scar on the most cherished possession of a woman i.e.
her dignity, honour, reputation and not the least her chastity. Rape is not only a crime against the
person of a woman, it is a crime against the entire society."

17. I think that right to life includes right to live with human dignity and all that goes along
with it, namely the bare necessities of life such as adequate nutrition, clothing and shelter over the
head and facilities for reading writing and expressing oneself in diverse forms, freely moving about
and mixing and mingling with fellow human beings.

18. Rape is a very dehumanizing offence which not only shatters the victim physically but
leaves scar in the memories of the victim which does not heal with time. The victim of such an
offence suffers from "Rape Trauma Syndrome" which has been medically defined as follows:-

"No person exposed to severe trauma is immune to suffering and the signs of that
suffering are referred to as symptoms. When these symptoms can be grouped as a pattern over
time, they are referred to as a syndrome. Once the pattern becomes entrenched or unlikely to
change, and affect a person's functioning in a permanent way it is referred to as a disorder and is
regarded as a mental illness.

Rape Trauma Syndrome "RTS" is the medical term given to the response that
survivors have to rape. It is very important to note that RTS is the natural response of a
psychologically healthy person to the trauma of rape so these symptoms do not constitute a mental
disorder or illness.

The most powerful factor in determining psychological suffering or damage is the
character of the traumatic event itself. Individual personality characteristics count for little in the
face of overwhelming events. Physical harm or injuries are also not as great a factor since
individuals with little or no physical harm may yet be severely affected by their exposure to a
traumatic situation. Before looking at the effects of rape it is therefore important to first examine
the character of the trauma that is rape.
5 All. Ravindra Kumar Vs State Of U.P.

565

Not only is there the element of surprise, the threat of death and the threat of injury,
there is also the violation of the person that is synonymous with rape. This violation is physical,
emotional and moral and associated with the closest human intimacy of sexual contact. The
intention of the rapist is to profane this most private aspect of the person and render his victim
utterly helpless. The character of the event is thus connected to the perpetrator's apparent need to
terrorise, dominate and humiliate the victim. The victim is therefore most likely to see his actions
as motivated by deliberate malice, a malice impossible for her to understand. Rape by its very
nature is intentionally designed to produce psychological trauma. It is form of organised social
violence comparable only to the combat of war, being but the private expression of the same force.
We get nowhere in our understanding of Rape Trauma Syndrome if we think of rape as simply
being unwanted sex. Where combat veterans suffer Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, rape survivors
experience similar symptoms on a physical, behavioural and psychological level. Some of the
symptoms are present immediately after the rape while other only appear at a later stage."

19. But it needs no reiteration to say that if the evidence of prosecutrix remains consistent,
reliable and trustworthy and defence fails to succeed to create any doubt or suspicion on her
testimony, then, it would be safe to convict the accused.

20. As far as the statement of victim is concerned, she has stated her date of birth to be
01.05.1993, according to which she was about more than 17 years on the date of occurrence. Any
how it is admitted position that she was above 16 years on the date of occurrence. The victim has
stated that on the date of incident, she was going to take medicine. She did not go to school. When
she reached near the tube well of Jagdish, she met Ravindra and Ankit. Ravindra caught her hands
and Ankit pushed her from behind. They took her in a sugar-cane field. Ravindra broke open the
tape of her Salwar and both raped her. When Ankit raped her, Ravindra caught her hands and when
Ravindra raped her, Ankit caught her hands. She raised alarm when Mukesh and Mangey came
there. Mukesh telephoned her father who came, she was practically unconscious by that time. I was
constrained to see as to how a fishing cross-examination was done on this witness. An extraordinary lengthy cross-examination was conducted on her and all irrelevant questions were put to
her. She admitted that initially her father and uncle were not inimical but presently they were
having inimical terms. She has stated that at the time of incident, she was wearing her school
uniform because initially she decided to go to school, but since she was feeling nausea, she decided
to go to the doctor. When she was being raped she was wearing suit, her Salwar and underwear,
which were taken off and kept separately. This fact finds corroboration from the statement of
doctor PW-5 Dr. Amita Singh, who has stated that there were no injuries on the breast of the
victim. When she was not completely disrobed, she would not sustain injuries on her breast.
Further, the victim has stated in her statement that she was made to fall when she was standing and
when she raised alarm, Ravindra was raping her. When her father was called, she wore her clothes
and remained sitting there for sometime. Further, she has stated that while rape was being
committed, her mouth was pressed and as soon as she opened her mouth, she raised alarm. Later
on, Mukesh and Mange came there. In spite of extensive fishing cross-examination conducted on
this witness, there is no iota of evidence to discredit her testimony as regards the factum of rape is
concerned. It has been established by the evidence of this witness that Ravindra raped her. Since
566 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
the matter of Ankit is pending before the Juvenile Justice Board, his matter need not be discussed
here.

21. It is trite law that in the cases of rape, it is not necessary that the victim should sustain
injuries, but in this case, the victim has sustained injuries. The learned counsel for appellant has
submitted that the medical report of the victim cannot be relied upon because the injuries have been
noted by a private doctor. Hence, it cannot be relied upon. This is not a case in which there were
minor injuries which could have been managed by the victim. In fact, the injuries sustained by the
victim were serious as regards the danger to her life was concerned, because she was profusely
bleeding. If bleeding would not have been controlled, it would have been difficult to save her life.
According to Ext. Ka-7, the victim was not able to give any response to the questions. Her pulses
were not able to palpate and blood pressure was not recordable. It appears that on humanitarian
grounds, home-guard Kuldeep who brought the patient, requested the doctor to explain the risk to
attendant who was Ram Naresh Tomar, Pradhanpati to whom the risk was explained by the doctor.
Haemoglobin of the victim was 7.29, her blood group was A positive. A fresh tear was seen in the
hymen at 6 o'clock position and a big tear on the post-vaginal wall was seen standing from the
mid-line to the lateral vaginal wall on both the sides. A tear was also seen on the perineum in the
midline. The clothes were handed over to the Constable, the wound was stitched and the bleeding
was controlled. PW-5 Dr. Amita Singh stated that the patient was unable to speak. She was
unconscious. Except on the private parts, she had no injuries on her body.

22. There is nothing in the cross-examination of PW-5 Dr. Amita Singh which could
discredit her testimony. According to this witness, the victim was stated to be in danger although
the doctor had asked the attendants to take the victim to the government hospital but since her
condition was serious, the attendants wanted the victim to be treated at private hospital itself where
she was admitted. Dr. Neera Panwar, PW-3, has stated that since the victim was already treated at
private hospital, hence she just referred the victim to the Higher Centre because the victim did not
go herself to medical examination. It appears that since the wound was stitched and the medical aid
was given and the condition of the patient had been controlled, hence the attendants required not to
get her medically examined at the Government Hospital. Reverting back to her statement, the
victim PW-2 has stated that she remained in Astha Hospital for 5-6 days. She was unconscious,
hence she did not know as to who accompanied her to the hospital, but she gained conscious in the
night after the date on which the incident took place. She admitted that she was not got checked at
the government hospital, she was examined at the Astha Hospital. A fishing cross-examination was
done as to at what time she reached the government hospital, at what time she reached the private
hospital and who accompanied her. Although she has given the answers to these questions, but I
think that it would not be expected that the victim who suffered rape and was bleeding profusely
would remember all these things. The prime consideration at that time would be saving the life of
victim than resorting to legal formalities. Hence, defence miserably failed to discredit the testimony
of this witness.

23. The learned counsel for the defence has submitted that the witnesses who have come on
the spot were not examined which causes a dent in the prosecution case. I do not think so because
5 All. Ravindra Kumar Vs State Of U.P.

567
the statement of victim is intact and trustworthy, hence there is no necessity of any corroboration so
far as the factual aspect of the matter is concerned since the medical evidence corroborates the
brutal rape on the victim who has specifically stated in her statement that she did not give consent
to the act of rape.

24. In (2015) 4 SCC 762 Deepak Vs. State of Haryana, the Apex Court in para - 24 has
observed as follows:-

"In order to enable the court to draw presumption as contained in Section 114-A
against the accused, it is necessary to first prove the commission of sexual intercourse by the
accused on the prosecutrix and second, it should be proved that it was done without the consent of
the prosecutrix. Once the prosecutrix states in her evidence that she did not consent to act of sexual
intercourse done by the accused on her which, as per her statement, was committed by the accused
against her will and the accused failed to give any satisfactory explanation in his defence evidence
on this issue, the court will be entitled to draw the presumption under Section 114-A of the Indian
Evidence Act against the accused holding that he committed the act of sexual intercourse on the
prosecutrix against her will and without her consent. The question as to whether the sexual
intercourse was done with or without consent being a question of fact has to be proved by the
evidence in every case before invoking the rigour of Section 114-A of the Indian Evidence Act."

25. Apex Court in Banti Alias Balvinder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 1992
CrilJ 715, which is a case of gang rape has observed as follows:-

"It may be stated here that this is a case of gang rape. A woman, howsoever
dissolute she may be, would not ordinarily consent to insulting, humiliating and repulsive act of
sexual intercourse on her by a number of persons, as if she were a chattel for public use. The law
recognises that a woman even of easy virtue, or even a whore for that matter, has personal dignity
and honour. She cannot be violated, if only because of her lowly profession. A presumption has
been enacted in Section 114A of the Evidence Act which says that in a case inter alia of gang rape,
where sexual intercourse by the accused is proved and the question is whether it was without the
consent of the woman alleged to have been raped and she states in her evidence before the Court
that she did not consent, the Court shall presume that she did not consent. Hence the legal position
is that if the fact of sexual intercourse by the accused is proved, the evidence of the woman in a
case of gang rape that she did not consent to sexual intercourse would have to be believed and it
will not help the defence merely to show that the woman was of easy virtue. It is true that the
presumption about want of consent is not conclusive. Evidence may still be given to disprove it. But
in the absence of any evidence of disproof, there is no option with the Court but to raise a
presumption about non-consent if circumstances for raising the presumption Under Section 114A
exist. It must however be conceded that immoral character would still not be an absolutely
irrelevant circumstance. It may render the story itself as incredible. It may take away probative
force of the story, told as it is by a woman with no scruples or morals. It may be difficult to believe
a woman of immoral character if she says that some persons had sexual intercourse with her unless
there existed satisfactory proof in support of the story of sexual intercourse."
568 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
26. Coming to the case in hand, I find that the prosecutrix in her statement in clear terms
has stated that she did not give her consent for commission of rape to the appellant and that the act
of sexual violence was committed on her against her will. The appellant was not able to give any
satisfactory explanation in his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Nor he was able to
adduce any defence evidence to rebut the presumption contained under Section 114-A of the
Evidence Act against him. So far as the commission of sexual intercourse is concerned, it is proved
by the oral and medical evidence that the appellant performed rape on the prosecutrix. The
testimony of the prosecutrix is vital.

27. I am quite aware of the provisions of law regarding the medical examination of the
victim prescribed under Section 164-A Cr.P.C., which reads as follows:-

"164 A. Medical examination of the victim of rape.- (1) Where, during the stage
when an offence of committing rape or attempt to commit rape is under investigation, it is proposed
to get the person of the woman with whom rape is alleged or attempted to have been committed or
attempted, examined by a medical expert, such examination shall be conducted by a registered
medical practitioner employed in a hospital run by the Government or a local authority and in the
absence of a such a practitioner, by any other registered medical practitioner, with the consent of
such woman or of a person competent to give such consent on her behalf and such woman shall be
sent to such registered medical practitioner within twenty-four hours from the time of receiving the
information relating to the commission of such offence.

(2) The registered medical practitioner, to whom such woman is sent shall, without
delay, examine her and prepare a report of his examination giving the following particulars,
namely:-

(I) the name and address of the woman and of the person by whom she was
brought;
(II) the age of the woman;

(III) the description of material taken from the person of the woman for DNA
profiling;
(IV) marks of injury, if any, on the person of the woman;

(V) general mental condition of the woman; and

(VI) other material particulars in reasonable detail.

(3)Â The report shall state precisely the reasons for each conclusion arrived at.

(4) The report shall specifically record that the consent of the woman or of the
person competent to give such consent on her behalf to such examination had been obtained.
5 All. Ravindra Kumar Vs State Of U.P.

569
(5) The exact time of commencement and completion of the examination shall also
be noted in the report.

(6) The registered medical practitioner shall, without delay forward the report to
the investigation officer who shall forward it to the Magistrate referred to in section 173 as part of
the documents referred to in clause (a) of sub-section (5) of that section.

(7) Nothing in this section shall be construed as rendering lawful any examination
without the consent of the woman or of any person competent to give such consent on her behalf.

Explanation. - For the purposes of this section, "examination" and "registered
medical practitioner" shall have the same meanings as in section 53."

28. The reason for not getting the victim examined by government doctor has been very well
plausibly explained in as much as the victim was bleeding profusely and if the attendants would have taken
her to the government hospital there were chances that she would have collapsed due to excessive bleeding.
Besides this, another reason why I am inclined to rely on the prosecution case is the forensic lab report,
according to which on Salwar, underwear, baniyan, Kurta and Chunni blood stains were found. On the
underwear sperms were found and on the underwear semen was also found. This clearly supports the
prosecution case. The reference slip of the doctor of government hospital is Ext. Ka-2 to whom the victim
was taken but she referred the victim to the Higher Centre.

29. The Investigating Officer PW-4, Ramji Lal has stated that on 23.12.2010 the apparel of the
victim was sent for forensic lab examination. He has stated that even in the first information report role of the
rape was assigned to Ravindra and the victim has stated to him during her statement under Section 161
Cr.P.C. that she was raped by Ravindra.

30. The learned counsel for appellant has also submitted that the victim was a young lady. At the
time of incident accused Ravindra was also about 20 years of age because as per his statement recorded
under Section 313 Cr.P.C, which was recorded on 18.08.2012. Occurrence is said to have taken place on
23.09.2010. Hence, at the time of incident, he was a lad of 19 years of age. He has been convicted and
sentenced to 10 years' rigorous imprisonment. Hence, his sentence be reduced.

31. The law of reduction of sentence has been laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Sevaka
Perumal etc. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu AIR 1991 SC 1463, the Hon'ble Court in the matter of awarding
proper sentence to the accused in a criminal trial has cautioned the Courts as under:

"Undue sympathy to impose inadequate sentence would do more harm to the justice system
to undermine the public confidence in the efficacy of law and society could not long endure under such
serious threats. It is, therefore, the duty of every court to award proper sentence having regard to the nature
of the offence and the manner in which it was executed or committed etc."
570 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
32. The accused appellant has been convicted under Section 376(2)(g) IPC. Section 376(2)(g) IPC
reads as follows :-

"(g) commits gang rape, shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which
shall not be less than ten years but which may be for life and shall also be liable to fine: Provided that the
Court may, for adequate and special reasons to be mentioned in the judgment, impose a sentence of
imprisonment of either description for a term of less than ten years.

Explanation 1.-Where a woman is raped by one or more in a group of persons acting in
furtherance of their common intention, each of the persons shall be deemed to have committed gang rape
within the meaning of this sub-section.

Explanation 2.-"Women's or children's institution" means an institution, whether called
an orphanage or a home for neglected woman or children or a widows' home or by any other name, which
is established and maintained for the reception and care of woman or children.

Explanation 3.-"Hospital" means the precincts of the hospital and includes the precincts
of any institution for the reception and treatment of persons during convalescence or of persons requiring
medical attention or rehabilitation."

33. The minimum sentence which could be imposed under Section 376 (2) (g) is ten years. The
Court imposed the minimum sentence keeping in view the manner in which rape was committed in a ghastly
and brutal way and how the life and soul of the victim and her family was shattered, I do not find it to be a fit
case in which sentence can be reduced from the minimum sentence awarded by the Trial Court.

34. There is no force in the appeal. Hence, it is dismissed.

35. The appellant is in jail. The appellant shall serve out his remainder of sentence.

36. Let a copy of this order of sent to the concerned Court below.
----------
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 19.05.2016

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE HARSH KUMAR, J.

Second Appeal No.- 1188 Of 1988

Ram Niwas ...Appellant
Versus
Ramesh Chand ...Respondent