STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. ASHA RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There can never be more graver and heinous crime than the father being charged of raping his own daughter. He not only delicts the law but it is a betrayal of trust. The father is the fortress and refuge of his daughter in whom the daughter trusts. Charged of raping his own daughter under his refuge and fortress is worst than the gamekeeper becoming a poacher and treasury guard becoming a robber.

(2.) The facts of this case as unfolded by the prosecution shocked the judicial conscience. Briefly stated the facts are as follows :- The respondent-accused Asha Ram married to one Smt. Kalawati - PW3. Out of the wedlock they have three daughters and two sons. Accused and PW-3 were having strained relations and living separately. PW-3 was living in some servant quarters in Brock-hurst with one of the daughters and two sons. Accused was living in the accommodation allotted to him in the servant quarters attached to Raj Bhawan with the other two daughters namely Kumari Uma and Kumari Seema (prosecutrix). In the intervening night of 23/24-8-1988 the accused returned home at about 12.30 a.m. and went to the room where his daughters Uma and Seema were sleeping. He asked Kumari Seema to serve him the dinner. On being asked, the prosecutrix went to the kitchen and brought the food to the room of the accused. The accused is alleged to have bolted the door of his room from inside and after switching off the light asked Kumari Seema to sleep in the same room. He then forcibly made Kumari Seema to lie on the bed and after untying the waistband of her salwar started to commit rape on her. The prosecutrix pleaded with the accused that she is his daughter but he turned a deaf ear and forcibly committed sexual intercourse with her. It is further alleged that when she tried to raise cries, her mouth was gagged by the accused with a piece of cloth. Her sister Uma started knocking at the door. After about half an hour when she came out of the room of her father she found the door of the quarters, where her sister was sleeping, bolted from outside and her sister was not at home. Being frightened she climbed down from sanitary pipe. She met her sister on the ground floor of the building and both returned to their quarter. She narrated the entire occurrence to her sister Uma. On the following morning they went to their mother to inform her about the occurrence. The prosecutrix accompanied by her mother went to the police station and on the basis of her statement lodged a complaint registered vide FIR No.110 of 1988 (Ex. PA) under Section 376, IPC.

(3.) In the course of investigation a prima facie case was established. A charge was laid under Section 376, IPC and the Trial Court after examining PW-1 (prosecutrix), PW2-Kumari Uma, sister of the prosecutrix, PW3-mother of the prosecutrix, medical evidence of PW4-Dr. A Banerji and PW5-Dr. H. K.Premi, PW11-Dr. L.R. Verma and found the respondent-Asha Ram guilty under Section 376, IPC and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and a fine of Rs.1000/- and in default, rigorous imprisonment for 3 months. Aggrieved thereby the respondent preferred an appeal before the High Court registered as Criminal Appeal No. 6 of 1994. By the impugned order Justice R. L. Khurana (since retired) acquitted the accused on a perverse finding against all canon of justice. Hence this appeal by special leave by the State of Himachal Pradesh.