VIPIN ALIAS BIPIN SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment and order on sentence dated 28.02.2012 and 19.03.2012 respectively wherein the appellant stood convicted under Sections 363/366/376 (2)(g) of the IPC. For his first conviction, he had been sentenced to undergo RI for a period of four years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000.00 and in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for a period of two months. For his second conviction, he had been sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000.00 and in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for 2 months. For his conviction under Sec. 376(2)(g) of the IPC, he had been sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000.00 and in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for a period of two months. He had also been convicted for the offence under Sec. 506 of the Penal Code for which a sentence of RI one year had been imposed. The sentences were to run concurrently. Benefit of Sec. 428 of the Cr.PC had been granted to the appellant.

(2.) The version of the prosecution was unfolded in the complaint made by Akeel Ahmad the father of the victim (PW-9). He had lodged a missing report on 07.05.2009 at PS Ambedkar Nagar which was to the effect that two of his minor daughters were missing from the house. On inquiry, it was learnt that the accused along with his brother-in-law and another had taken his daughters to Khanpur and then to Farukhabad. The girls were recovered from Farukhabad on 09.05.2009. Their statements under Sec. 164 of the Cr.PC were recorded by the learned MM on 12.05.2009. The statement of the elder victim aged around 14 years 'R' (PW-11) revealed that in the afternoon of 06.05.2009 when she was in the company of her younger sister 'F' (PW-12), the accused Vipin pushed them into an Alto car; their mouth was closed. He was accompanied by another boy i.e. his brother-in-law. They were taken in a bus to Farukhabad. They kept them confined in a room on the ground floor. Her sister was given an intoxicating substance in a glass of water. At night three persons i.e. the accused, his brother-in-law and his younger brother (whom she could recognize) committed rape upon her.

(3.) On the same day, the statement of her younger sister (Ex.PW-4/B) was also recorded by the learned MM which was largely on the same lines. Both the minor girls were medically examined by Dr. Mukta Aggarwal (PW-1). The MLC of the elder victim was proved as Ex.PW-1/C. Hymen of the victim was ruptured. It was noted that there was positive evidence of sexual contact. The MLC of the younger sister (PW-12) was proved as Ex.PW-1/A. Her hymen was also found ruptured. The accused was medically examined by Dr. Manish Goel (PW-8) who had opined that there was nothing to suggest that the accused was not capable of performing the sexual act.