AZAD SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment dated 19.11.2010 and order on sentence dated 25.11.2010 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (West), Delhi in Sessions Case No.251/1/10 arising out of FIR No. 314/09 under Section 376/506 IPC, Police Station Nangloi whereby the appellant was convicted under Section 376 IPC and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and fine of Rs.5000/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month.

(2.) Prosecution case emanates from the fact that on 13.08.2009 prosecutrix "A" was sleeping in her room at ground floor while her parents alongwith her other brothers and sisters were sleeping at the roof. Appellant was residing in the adjoining room. Door of prosecutrix was opened due to summer season. The appellant entered her house and committed rape on her. Prosecutrix informed her parents about the misdeed of the appellant. The appellant was beaten by her parents and neighbours. Police was informed on which DD No.13A was recorded and assigned to ASI Rampal who reached the spot. On coming to know that it was a case of rape, PW-8 ASI Mala was informed who alongwith lady constable Sunita reached the spot. Prosecutrix as well as accused were taken to hospital for their medical examination. Statement of prosecutrix Ex.PW5/A was recorded on which FIR Ex.PW-1/A was registered. The blood stained bedsheet and mattress were seized. During the course of investigation, the seized articles and the articles handed over by the doctor during the medical examination of the prosecutrix and accused were sent to FSL. After completing investigation, chargesheet was submitted against the accused.

(3.) Charge under Section 376/506 IPC was framed against the accused to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. In order to substantiate its case, prosecution in all examined 17 witnesses. All the incriminating evidence was put to the accused by recording his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C wherein he denied the case of the prosecution. According to him, his brother Balbir had expired. He alongwith his entire family had gone to Rohtak and returned alone on 13.08.2009 while his family remained at Rohtak. He alleged his false implication in this case and claimed innocence. In order to substantiate his case, he examined four defence witnesses.