MANJEET SINGH @ ANKUR Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A complaint (Ext. Ka-1) was given to PS Kotwali, Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar on 11.05.2002 by PW 1 Dhananjay Mishra regarding kidnapping and rape with his daughter Archana Mishra, aged 15 years. According to the complaint, on 07.05.2002, when he returned from his office at 7:00 p.m., he did not find his daughter in the house. He made an inquiry from his neighbours and his acquaintances. On 11.05.2002, co-villagers Ramesh and Chhotu informed the complainant that Archana was seen with Manjeet Singh alias Ankur, Dinesh and Pankaj on 07.05.2002, at 8:00 a.m., near Danpur. A report regarding kidnapping and abduction was therefore, lodged in PS Rudrapur on 11.05.2002 at 1:15 p.m.

(2.) Investigating Officer started investigation on the basis of said first information report. The victim was recovered on 19.05.2002 near railway station of Rudrapur. Accused Manjeet Singh was apprehended. The victim was medically examined whereupon doctor found that there was no external injury on her body. Hymen was torn. The patient was menstruating. Vaginal smear was sent for histopathological examination. The victim was also referred to the Radiologist for determination of age. No definite opinion about the rape could be given. No spermatozoa was found in the vaginal smear. According to X-ray report, the age of the victim was about 18 years. Upon completion of the investigation, a charge sheet regarding the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC was submitted against the accused Manjeet Singh. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions.

(3.) When the trial began and prosecution opened it s case, the charges for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC were framed against the accused-appellant, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Five prosecution witnesses, namely, Dhananjay Mishra (complainant), PW 2 Km. Archana, PW Dr. G.M.Joshi, PW 4 Dr. Anita Upreti and PW 5 IO Lata Joshi were examined on behalf of prosecution. Incriminating evidence was put to the accused while taking statement under section 313 Cr.P.C., in reply to which, he said that prosecution witnesses have told a lie and he was falsely implicated in the case. No evidence was given in defence. Upon trial of the evidence and after hearing both the sides, learned court below held the accused guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 366 and 376 IPC. He was awarded five years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000/- as regards offence punishable under Section 366 IPC and seven years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000/- as regards offence punishable under Section 376 IPC. Aggrieved against such judgment and order, the present criminal appeal was preferred.