SUDHIR KUMAR Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal, preferred under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short Cr.P.C.), is directed against the judgment and order dated 08.11.2011 passed by the District & Sessions Judge, Pauri Garhwal in Sessions Trial No. 21 of 2003, whereby accused/appellant Sudhir Kumar has been convicted under Section 376, I.P.C. and sentenced to seven years rigorous imprisonment and directed to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/ -. In default of payment of fine, further imprisonment for one month has been awarded. As per the prosecution version, on 29.04.2002 at about 5:00 - Ram Singh lodged a written report (Ext. A -1) with the Patwari, Patti Kandarsyun, Tehsil Thailisain with the averment that Reethu Singh, who is employed in Delhi, took his wife to Delhi for her treatment, but she died in the month of March, 2002. Km. Guddi -victim and two little children were residing in the house at village. On 26.04.2002, it was revealed out that Km. Guddi was missing w.e.f. 23.04.2002. Beena Devi, elder sister of Km. Guddi, had come to her matrimonial house, from whom it came to know that Shanti Devi W/o. Jagdish Prasad, resident of Mathigaon had taken Guddi to Buwakhal for treatment. When Guddi returned back during daytime on 26.04.2002, then it was known that she was pregnant. On making inquiry, Guddi told that about one and half year before, when she had gone to jungle to fetch fodder, the accused Sudhir, S/o. Jagdish Prasad, by threatening her to kill and without her consent, committed rape on her. The accused threatened her that in case she discloses the fact to anyone, he will kill her. Thereafter, the accused, time and again by threatening her, committed rape on her and when she informed the accused about her pregnancy, the accused told her to run away silently to unknown destination and in case of any disclosure, he will kill her siblings. It is also averred in the F.I.R. that brother of the victim made public the incident. Thereafter, a meeting was convened in the village in which the victim narrated the incident of rape committed by the accused. She further narrated that she was pregnant due to the rape committed by the accused. The accused also confessed his guilt in the meeting. Father of the victim Reethu Singh was also informed through telephone. The victim was sent to the house of the accused, but his family members did not accept the victim. The victim, while going to the jungle, delivered a female child in the way. Thereafter, when the victim, along with newborn baby was taken to the house of the accused, the accused hurling abuses and threatening to kill, refused to accept them. Leaving the victim, aged 16 years with the girl child, at the house of the accused, Ram Singh went to lodge the F.I.R.

(2.) THE case was investigated upon by P.W. -4 Patti Patwari Mahanand Bhatt -Investigating Officer, who during investigation recorded statement of the victim, apprehended the accused, prepared site -plan and after the medical examination of the prosecutrix got done, the I.O. filed charge -sheet against the accused appellant under section 376/504/506 of I.P.C. Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pauri, on receipt of the charge sheet, after giving necessary copy to the accused, as required under section 207 of Cr.P.C. committed the case to the Court of session for trial. Learned Sessions Judge, Pauri Garhwal framed charge of offence punishable under Section 376, I.P.C. to which accused Sudhir Kumar pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. On this, prosecution got examined P.W. -1 Reethu Singh -father of the victim, P.W. -2 Guddi Devi -prosecutrix, P.W. -3 Dr. Neeta Jain, who conducted medical examination and P.W. -4 Mahanand Bhatt -Investigating Officer. Oral and documentary evidence was put to the accused under Section 313, Cr.P.C., in reply to which he alleged that the evidence adduced against him is false. He stated that victim was married to him before the incident, but thereafter he took divorce and the victim got married to someone else. After hearing the parties, the trial Court found accused Sudhir Kumar guilty of offence punishable under Section 376, I.P.C. and convicted him accordingly. Aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 08.11.2011 passed by the District & Sessions Judge, Pauri Garhwal in Sessions Trial No. 21 of 2003, this appeal has been preferred by the convict.

(3.) P .W. -1 Reethu Singh -father of the prosecutrix has stated that Ram Singh (complainant) has already died. He stated that due to the death of his wife, he left his son Harendra at his home. On 27.04.2002 at Delhi, he received information telephonically from Ram Singh that his daughter Guddi has given birth to an illegitimate child. Embarrassed with the news, he reached his home on 29.04.2002 and it came to know that Guddi was sent to the house of the accused Sudhir, but mother of the accused did not accept her, due to which Guddi went towards jungle, where she gave birth to a female child and thereafter both Guddi and newborn child were brought back to the house of the accused. He stated that on making inquiry, it was revealed that on 23.07.2002 Guddi had gone with Shanti Devi for her treatment and returned back on 26.07.2002 and on being inquired by her elder sister -Beena, Guddi narrated the entire story. Guddi told that one and half year before, when she was in jungle, the accused Sudhir, by threatening her, committed rape on her and thereafter often committed rape on her by giving threats. When Guddi became pregnant and the accused came to know about the pregnancy, he continued to extend threats to Guddi to remain silent. When Guddi delivered baby, Harendra -brother of the victim, told the Panchas of the village and the Panchas convened Panchayat, in which Guddi narrated the entire story. The accused was called by the Panchayat, where he confessed his guilt, accused kept the baby with him. On the persuasion of the villagers, the accused took and kept Guddi and baby with him but he was not ready to keep Guddi under his patronage and cut off the relation with his daughter.