HARI SINGH RAWAT Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Foreword There are cases that shock the judicial conscience. This is one. In our country studies have shown that a large number of instances of rape are by close family members. The victim silently suffers the ordeal for years on end. This is one such case of incestuous rape. The Appellant here has been held guilty by the trial Court of repeatedly raping his step-daughter over a period of eight years. The victim picked up courage to break her silence and go to the police on 23rd June 2015. By then she had given birth to two children, aged 6 and 3 years at the time. DNA tests have confirmed that the Appellant is their biological father.

(2.) By this judgment this Court affirms the judgment of the trial Court. This Court draws attention to the urgent need for a comprehensive scheme, preferably legislative, to address the needs of the victims of crime, which in this case includes not only the prosecutrix, but her children and the wife and children of the Appellant. Complete justice requires redressing the victim "?s suffering even while punishing the criminal. This appeal

(3.) The challenge in this appeal is to the impugned judgement dated 10th August 2016 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ)/Special Fast Track Court, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi was passed in Session Case No. 9243 of 2015 arising out of FIR No. 916 of 2015 registered at Police Station (PS) Vasant Vihar. The Appellant has been convicted of the offences under Section 376 (2) (f) IPC (rape committed by a close relative) and Section 376 (2) (n) IPC (repeated commission of rape) and Section 506 IPC (criminal intimidation). This appeal also challenges the order on sentence dated 17th August 2016 whereby he was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 10,000, and in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment ( "?RI "?) for six months for each of the offences under Sections 376 (2) (n) and 376 (2) (f) IPC ; and for the offence under Section 506 IPC to undergo RI for one year with a fine of Rs. 5,000, and in default of payment of fine, to undergo RI for three months. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently. 50% of the fine amount was directed to be paid to the prosecutrix as compensation. Background