MEENA SHARMA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THERE are two appellants before this Court. They are husband and wife. Appellant Rajinder Kumar Sharma has been convicted by the Session Judge for the offence under Sections 376/325/342 of the IPC whereas appellant Meena Sharma has been convicted for the offence under Section 376 read with Section 109 of the IPC as also for the offence under Section 342 of the IPC. Appellant Rajinder Kumar Sharma has been sentenced to undergo RI for 7 year and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/ - in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for 3 months for the offence under Section 376 IPC; for the offence under Section 325 IPC he has been sentenced to undergo RI for 1 years and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/ - in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for 2 months; for the offence under Section 342 he has been sentenced to undergo RI for 6 months. The second appellant Meena Sharma has been sentenced to undergo RI for 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/ - in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for 3 months for the offence under Section 109 of the IPC read with Section 376 IPC; for the offence under Section 342 she has been sentenced to undergo SI for 6 months. Sentences were to run concurrently. Benefit of Section 428 of the Cr.P.C. had been granted to the appellants.

(2.) VERSION of the prosecution is that on 13.10.1999 the prosecutrix 'M' while returning home from her friend's house at Sewa Nagar met the accused Meena Sharma; she was known to her as she used to live in her neighborhood. PW -1 accompanied Meena to her house; there was no one present at that time; after sometime Meena left the house and locked the door from outside. Thereupon accused Rajinder entered the house; he covered the mouth of the victim with his palm; he committed rape upon her; when she regained consciousness she was in the hospital. Her statement (Ex.PW -1/A) was recorded. Pursuant to this statement the rukka (Ex.PW10/2) was taken and the FIR was registered at 11.00 a.m. on the same day. The victim was subjected to a medical examination. Her MLC Ex.PW -8/1 records that she had been brought to the AIIMS hospital by her father; alleged history of being abducted by neighbor and being kept in a wooden box was noted. The patient was not responding to oral commands; there was a flickering of eye lashes and only on noxious stimulus being given the patient responded; no external injury was noted. This MLC was proved as Ex.PW -8/1. The Senior Resident Doctor had referred the patient to a gynecologist and the gynecologist also noted that there was no obvious injury on the external genitalia but slight bleeding was noted; the hymen was not torn; she was having her period; vaginal slide and underwear of the prosecutrix were preserved.

(3.) ON oath in Court the victim was examined as PW -1. She had stuck to the same version. On oath she deposed that on the fateful day when she was returning home from her friend's house she met Meena aunty and at her asking she went to her house. After sometime Meena left the house and bolted the door from outside; co -accused Rajinder entered the house; he committed rape upon her. She did not remember what had happened thereafter; when she regained consciousness she found herself in the hospital.