STATE Vs. SURENDER KUMAR @PAPPEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C.') assails the impugned judgment and order dated 01.02.2006, rendered by the learned Trial Court in Sessions Case No.178/97, arising out of FIR No.95/97, under Sections 363/376/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC'), Police Station- Alipur, whereby Surender Kumar alias Pappey, respondent No.1 (hereinafter referred to as 'accused No.1') and Ravinder alias Kalia, respondent No.2 (hereinafter referred to as 'accused No.2') were acquitted.

(2.) By way of the order dated 15.10.1998, the charge for the commission of the offences punishable under sections 376 and 506 IPC were framed against accused No.1 and; accused No.2 was duly charged for the commission of the offences punishable under section 376 read with section 109 IPC, by the learned trial court.

(3.) The facts, as elaborated by the trial court are extracted in extenso, as follows: - "2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the victim female child, student of 8th class left her house in the company of her younger brother Satbir to case herself. While the victim child has just sat behind Shiv Mandir of the same village, both the accused persons came thereof. Ravinder @ Kalia accused is alleged to have caught hold of Satbir whereas his co-accused forcibly picked up the victim child, took her to a nearby vacant plot, threw her inside the school building alongside its wall and thereafter himself scaled over the wall. The victim child raised alarm but Surender accused pressed her mouth, threatened her with death and dragged her inside the school. Thereafter, Surender accused is alleged to have committed rape on the victim child under the trees by the side of wall of the school. The victim child cried, but Surender accused did not leave her. After committing rape, Surender accused brought the victim child back adopting the same passage and left her in the vacant plot weeping. Surender accused then threatened the victim child with death in case she narrated the occurrence to anyone. The victim child remained in the vacant plot. When her father arrived there in her search she narrated the occurrence. The father of the victim child then took her to the house and then informed the police. 3. Case of prosecution goes that on receiving information about some quarrel. SI Ram Krishan accompanied by Ct. Om Prakash of Delhi Home Guard reached village Sindhu where prosecutrix and her parents met them. The victim child then made statement before the S.I, who appended endorsement thereto and sent rukka to the police station which led to registration of the case."