Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, Aug 17: High Court has upheld the conviction and sentence awarded to accused by the trial court for attempt to rape a 6 year old girl by recording that there is no ground to interfere with the trial court judgment.
Follow the Daily Excelsior channel on WhatsApp
Justice Sanjay Dhar upheld the conviction of accused Sajad Ahmad Bhat alias Taiba Bhat for committing rape on a minor girl. The court recorded that there is evidence on record to show that the accused has fiddled with the private part of the victim which has resulted in minor injuries to the part and there is also evidence on record to show that semen was found on certain parts of the body of the victim who at the time of the occurrence was only 6 years old and when she deposed before the trial court she was between 9 – 10 years.
“Thus, the evidence on record clearly shows that the appellant/accused had done all that was required in accomplishing his evil design of committing rape upon the victim but for the fact that the prosecution witness reached the spot in the nick of time, the appellant would have succeeded in his evil design of committing rape upon a child of tender age”, court said.
Justice Dhar said, it is a clear-cut case of attempt to rape as such the court does not find any ground to interfere with the well-reasoned and well-crafted judgment of the trial court. In fact, the court has appreciated the manner in which the judgment has been drafted and the evidence has been appreciated by the trial court in the present case.
The accused-Bhat vide the verdict dated 22.02.2024 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Kulgam, whereby the accused was convicted of offences under Section 376 read with Section 511 RPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 4-years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000 for having committed the offences.
“The impugned judgment of conviction passed by the trial court is upheld and the appeal is dismissed accordingly. Appellant, who is in custody, shall remain in jail for serving the remaining period of sentence imposed upon him by the trial court”, Court ordered.
After framing charges against the accused by the court, the prosecution was directed to lead evidence in support of the charges. The prosecution examined all the 11 witnesses cited in the challan and after completion of prosecution evidence, statement of the appellant/accused in terms of Section 342 of the J&K CrPC was recorded by the trial court on 20.04.2017, in which he termed the case of the prosecution as false and stated that the prosecution witnesses are biased against him.
The appellant/accused, however, did not lead any evidence in defence. The trial court, after hearing the parties and after appreciation of the evidence on record, came to the conclusion that the charge framed against the appellant-accused stand established beyond any reasonable doubt and, accordingly, in terms of the impugned judgment, he has been convicted of offences under Section 376 and 511 of RPC.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
