STATE OF YUTTARAKHAND Vs. BHAGWATI SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal, preferred u/s 378 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is directed against the judgment and order dated 15.02.2008 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Rudraprayag in Sessions Trial No.16 of 2006, whereby the said Court has acquitted the accused/ respondent, Bhagwati Singh @ Bhagat Singh (present respondent), from the charge of offence punishable u/s 376(2)(g), 323, 452 IPC and one punishable u/s 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter will be referred as 'the SC & ST (PA) Act').

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

(3.) Prosecution story, in brief, is that P.W.1 Dhagi Devi used to live with her two children in village Chirpi, within the limits of village Panchayat Pipli, District Rudraprayag. Her age on the date of incident was 55 years. In the intervening night of 4/5.9.2004, accused Bhagwati Singh and one Surendra Singh (since absconding) entered in her house after breaking the doors, they committed rape on the said woman after brandishing a knife. Age of the two children of victim was 15 years (PW2 Kamla) and 12 years (PW3 Prakash). Victim was the member of scheduled caste community. On the next day, children of victim went to Village Pradhan, and thereafter the FIR (Ex.A-1) was got scribed by her and the same was given to the Patwari, Pipli. (In certain hilly areas of State of Uttarakhand, revenue officials are given police powers) On the basis of said report, CHIK FIR (Ex.A-4) was prepared on 5.9.2004 and crime no.1 of 2004 was registered in respect of the offences punishable u/s 376, 323, 452 IPC and one relating to offence punishable u/s 3(1)(x) of the SC & ST (PA) Act against the accused Bhagwati Singh and Surendra Singh. Investigation was taken up by Naib Tehsildar Shiv Raj Lal (since deceased), and from him in July 2006, PW9 Narendra Dutt Chamola took up the investigation. Victim was medically examined by PW4 Dr. Bhawani Pal on 8.9.2004, who did not find any scratch or swelling on the private parts but her Pathological slides were sent for the purpose of pathological examination. PW1 Dhagi Devi was again medically examined by PW7 Dr. G.S. Joshi on 8.9.2004 who observed abrasions and one contusion on her right thigh. Strangely, pathological examination appears to have been done after 21/2 years on 9.4.2007 by PW6 Dr. Satish Kumar, who gave the negative report for spermatozoa. After interrogation of witnesses and on completion of investigation, Narendra Dutt Chamola, Investigating Officer (PW9) submitted the chargesheet (Ex.A-11) against the accused Bhagwati Singh (present respondent) whereas co-accused Surendra Singh was shown as absconder.