DILDAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal by special leave, the appellant has impugned the judgement and order of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh dated 07.02.2005 in Criminal Appeal No. 51-SP/1998 whereby his conviction and sentence under Ss. 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code has been upheld. The appellant was sentenced to 7 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2,000.00 and in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 year u/s. 376 of the Indian Penal Code. He was also sentenced to under go rigorous imprisonment for 2 years u/s. 506 of the Indian Penal Code. The Trial Court directed the sentences to run concurrently.

(2.) The appellant herein was a drawing teacher in a government school where the prosecutrix was studying in Class VIII. The case of the prosecution is that on the 6.03.1987 when the prosecutrix had gone to the school for coaching in science practical, the appellant took her to a class room and raped her. Though the occurrence took place on the 6.03.1987 the prosecutrix did not disclose this fact to any one. Later when she experienced some pain in her abdomen she was attended to by her mother who found that the prosecutrix was pregnant. On further inquiry the prosecutrix revealed to her the fact that on 6.03.1987 such an occurrence had taken place. Her mother informed her father who was in service, and after her father came to the village, the matter was reported to the police. It is not in dispute that the prosecutrix is below 16 years of age.

(3.) The first information report was lodged by the prosecutrix-PW4 on 25.06.1987. On the following day, i.e., on 26.06.1987 she was medically examined by a doctor PW-1 who found that she was carrying 26 weeks pregnancy. The doctor obviously did not find any injury on her person or other evidence to establish conclusively that she was subjected to forcible intercourse. This was obviously so because the incident had taken place on 6.03.1987 while the prosecutrix was examined on 26.06.1987 by the doctor. The prosecutrix PW-4 in the course of her deposition stated that a similar incident had taken place earlier in December, 1986 and on that occasion as well it was the appellant who forcibly had sexual intercourse with her in one of the class rooms in the school.