RAM BHAGAT RAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated 8th February 2002 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge ('asj')holding the Appellant guilty of the offences under Section 367 (abduction with a view to being subjected to the unnatural lust of a person) read with 34 IPC and Section 377 (sodomy ). The appeal is also directed against the order dated 12th February 2002 sentencing the Appellant to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default further rigorous imprisonment for two months for the offence under Section 367 read with 34 IPC and a similar sentence in respect of the offence under section 377 IPC with the direction that both sentences shall run concurrently.

(2.) BY an order dated 8th March 2002 passed by this Court in the present appeal, the sentence awarded to the appellant was directed to remain suspended during the pendency of the appeal.

(3.) THE case of the prosecution is that at about 5 am on 7th October 1995 the victim, who was at that time around 18 years of age, was going to ease himself in the fields in front of the factory in village Tikri Kalan, Delhi where he worked. It is stated that at that point in time the Appellant and the co-accused, both of whom the victim knew from before met him. It is stated that the co-accused asked the victim to give them a sum of Rs. 100/-for purchasing liquor. It is stated that the appellant threatened the victim that if the said sum was not paid they would commit sodomy on him. When the victim refused to pay the money the co-accused caught hold of his hands and Appellant caught both the feet and they took him near a brick kiln which was about half a kilometer away. There the co-accused caught hold of the neck of the victim and closed his mouth by his hand. The appellant inserted his penis in the anus of the victim and continued doing so for about 5 to 7 minutes. The victim somehow managed to save himself and went to his father and narrated the incident to him. The victim's father took him to the Police Post (P. P) Tikri kalan and lodged a report with Assistant Subinspector suraj Bhan (PW 10) who recorded the statement of the victim and sent Constable sardar Singh (PW 7) to the Police Station (P. S) for registration of the case. PW 10 then accompanied the victim and his father to the spot and prepared site plan (Ex. PW 10/b)and recorded the statement of the victim's father. He returned to the P. P and commenced a search of the two accused. They were found near a primary school and oh the victim pointing them out both were arrested. The victim and the two accused were sent for medical examination. They were examined by Dr. Anil Garg (PW 2) who prepared three separate medico-legal certificates (MLCs) of the examination of each of them. The underwear of the victim, the pant and semen sample of the Appellant were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL)for examination. The FSL Report (Ex. PW 10/c)showed the presence of Group A semen on the underwear of the victim and the pant of Appellant. The examination by the FSL took place in 1997 by which time the semen sample was found to be too putrefied to enable detection of its Group.