AMAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Two appellants faced trial for having allegedly committed rape on a girl of tender age whose name need not be indicated and she can be described as the victim or the prosecutrix. The trial Court found the accused persons guilty of offence punishable under Section 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the IPC). They were each sentenced to undergo imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- each with default stipulation. In appeal, the conviction and sentence were upheld.

(2.) Prosecution version in a nutshell is that on 5-8-1993 the prosecutrix had gone to the field to ease herself at about 10.00 a.m. When she had reached near the field, the accused persons caught hold of her right arm and dragged her forcibly to the field. Accused Shiv Dayal shut her mouth with her chuni and both the accused persons thereafter forcibly raped her. They threatened to kill her if she told about the incident to anybody. She went to her house weeping and narrated the incident to her mother. One Karan Singh had seen the accused persons going away from the field. Since the father (PW-11) and brother of the prosecutrix were not at home the mother (PW-9) described the incident to a member of the Panchayat (PW-12). Report was lodged with police on 7-8-1993. Investigation was undertaken. The prosecutrix was medically examined and the accused persons after arrest were also medically examined. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed for alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 376/506, IPC. As the accused persons pleaded innocence, the trial was held. Thirteen witnesses were examined to further the prosecution version. The prosecutrix was examined as PW-7 while her mother was examined as PW-9 and father as PW-11. The accused persons pleaded that they have been falsely implicated. As Ran Singh, the brother of the prosecutrix had mis-appropriated funds of a temple and the accused persons had made a grievance, a meeting was held on 5-8-1993 where the allegations were specifically made. On 6-8-1993, Ran Singh and his friends had stopped the accused-Aman and had given him lathi blows. The accused Shiv Dayal and others had come to his rescue and he was taken to the hospital where he remained till 12-8-1993. On the basis of a complaint made by Ami Chand, brother of accused Aman, a case had also been instituted against Ran Singh and others. The accused persons examined a doctor who stated that on 6-8-1993 he had examined accused Aman and found several injuries on his person. another witness was examined to show about the assaults by Ran Singh and others. During trial, interestingly except the prosecutrix no other witness of relevance including the mother of the prosecutrix, her father and Karan Singh who had supposedly seen the accused persons going away from the field immediately after the occurrence, supported the prosecution version. The trial Court held that even though the mother of the prosecutrix and other witnesses whose evidence would have thrown some light had not supported the prosecution version, yet the testimony of the prosecutrix herself was considered sufficient for the conviction to be made and accordingly conviction was done as aforestated. Similar was the view taken by the High Court in the appeal filed by the accused persons.

(3.) In support of the appeal, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the prosecution version is highly improbable. Though the prosecutrixs evidence alone can form the foundation of conviction, yet in the background facts of the present case, it is clearly indicated that there was false implication on account of differences between the accused persons and the brother of the prosecutrix, and the Courts below should not have acted on her evidence. Furthermore, the evidence of the prosecutrix even if accepted does not prove commission of rape and the medical evidence also supports such a view. At the most, on the evidence taken on its entirety, and even if accepted to be true, it can be said that there was a preparation to commit rape, but the act was not actually done.