RAMESH Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 24.12.1999 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Udham Singh Nagar in Sessions Trail No. 73 of 1998 whereby the accused -appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under s 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short I.P.C.) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for eight years under Section 366 as well as under Section 376 of the I.P.C. and fine of Rs. 4,000/ -. In default of payment of fine, he has further been ordered to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment of each offence. Both the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently. Accused -appellant has, however, been acquitted of the charge punishable under Section 363 of the I.P.C.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that on 14.10.1997 at about four O 'clock in the evening accused -Ramesh enticed away victim No. 1. While leaving her house, victim No. 1 carried Rs. 500/ - in cash and one gold earring weighing one tola and one silver chain weighing ten tola with her. [Name of the victim has not been mentioned to prevent social victimization or ostracism of the victim of the sexual offence for which Section 228A of the I.P.C. has been enacted. It is advisable for the courts below not to indicate the name of the victim of sexual offences in their judgments.] Besides Ramesh, another accused Arjun also enticed away another girl (hereinafter referred as to victim No. 2). Victim No. 2 had taken Rs. 800/ - in cash, one pair of gold earring and one silver pandal with her. Lakhan Singh, father of victim No. 1, submitted written application dated 14.10.1997 (Ex. Ka -3) to Station House Officer, Police Station, Bazpur, U.S. Nagar on 16.10.1997 at about 8:15 a.m. According to the complainant, both the victims were seen going with the abovementioned -accused persons but out of fear none dared to protest as the accused were carrying deadly weapons with them. They were threatening that in case any one of them took action against them they would be killed. The complainant also apprehended danger to his life. On the basis of the application Ex. Ka -3, chick F.I.R. (Ex. Ka -6) was registered. The investigation was conducted by Sub Inspector P.C. Mathpal. Both the victims were arrested on 17.10.1997, the General Diary in this respect is Ex. Ka -8. They were medicolegally examined by Dr. B. Verma. The report of medical examination of victim No. 1 is Ex. Ka -5 and that of victim No. 2 is Ex. Ka -4.

(3.) IN order to prove its case, the prosecution produced Dr. G.S. Joshi, the Radiologist (PW -1). He examined victim No. 1. and as per the Radiological examination her age was found to be about 18 years. Lakhan Singh (PW -2) is the father of the victim No. 1, who reiterated the version given in the F.I.R. According to him, his daughter was enticed away by accused -Ramesh. He further stated that he was informed by father of Ramesh that his son had taken away the complainant 's daughter. He further deposed that there were six persons in all, who had concealed themselves in sugarcane field where his daughter was cutting the grass. Some other children were also present at the spot. The other children came back home and informed that victim No. 1 and victim No. 2 had been caught by six persons, who were armed with knives and country made pistols. PW -3 is victim No. 1 herself. She disclosed her age just 15 years at the time of the occurrence. According to her, she and victim No. 2 were cutting grass in the sugarcane field. She further stated that they were six persons in the sugarcane field and they were armed with weapons. They placed cloth on her face, due to which she could not make a noise. They also threatened her with a country made pistol. She further stated that all those persons had covered their faces therefore she could not recognize them. They took her away to some unknown place and kept her there for two days. She further stated that four of them left the place while two remained with them. On the second day she was brought to the police station. She further stated that accused -Ramesh committed rape upon her against her wishes and accused -Arjun committed rape upon victim No. 2.