SATISH KUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The prosecution case at best is unfolded in the statement of Kumari Kanchan, the prosecutrix in this case. According to her, in the year 1983, she was a student of sixth class in Nehru Kutia School. During that period, she was also learning stitching at a stitching centre, Malkaganj. According to her, in those days, accused Satish Kumar was living in her neighbourhood. He used to follow her as and when she went to school or to attend the stitching centre. Quite often the accused tried to talk to her. On 28-5-1983, while she was going to the stitching centre, the accused approached her and invited her to roam about with him. At that time, the accused told her that he had already taken the permission from her parents. She refused. However, the accused made her to sit in a three-wheeler scooter and they went to various places. When the night started setting in, the accused asked her to accompany him to Agra. She hesitated but then agreed to accompany him. They boarded a night train bound for Agra. On reaching there, the accused took her to a house of his relation. There she and the accused slept on the ground floor while the other members of the family slept on the first floor. During the night, the accused raped her against her will. At that time, the accused offered to marry her. On the next morning, both of them came back to Delhi by train. They boarded a bus for Malkaganj. When they reached Koria Bridge, the police apprehended them.

(2.) Before that, PW4 Ram Singh, father of the prosecutrix had already lodged the report of the missing of his daughter which put the law into motion. The investigation was handed over to PW-14, S.I. Amin Singh. Immediately after the arrest of the accused, he and the prosecutrix were sent for medical examination. The prosecutrix was also referred to Hindu Rao Hospital for her examination and determination of her bony age. The Investigating Officer took her clothes into possession, got her statement recorded u/s. 164, Cr. P.C. and on the receipt of the report from the office of the C.F.S.L. completed the challan and filed the same in the court.

(3.) On the basis of the report u/s. 173, Cr. P.C., the learned Addl. Sessions Judge framed the charge under Ss. 366/376, IPC. The aceused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.