VIJAY SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The aforesaid appeals are connected together and arise out of judgment and order dated 31.10.2007 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.4, Aligarh in Sessions Trial No. 367 of 1998 (State of U.P. vs. Anil) and Sessions Trial No. 278 of 1998 (State of U.P. vs. Vijay and another), whereby the accused/appellants Anil, Vijay Singh and Hariom Sharma have been convicted and sentenced under Section 342 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 for one year rigorous imprisonment, a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each and in default of payment of fine to one month simple imprisonment, under Section 376 (2) (g) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 to Life imprisonment, a fine of Rs. 20,000/- each and in default of payment of fine to two months simple imprisonment, under Section 3 (2) (v) of The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 to Life imprisonment, a fine of Rs. 20,000/- each and in default of payment of fine to two month simple imprisonment. Further, the appellant no.2 Anil Kumar in Criminal Appeal No. 7686 of 2007 has been convicted and sentenced under Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 to two years rigorous imprisonment, a fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default of payment of fine to two months imprisonment. The sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) In view of the legislative mandate as contained in Section 228-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the observation made by the Apex Court in various judgments, the identity of the prosecutrix/victim is not being disclosed and she will be referred to as "V" hereinafter.

(3.) The prosecution case as per the first information report lodged by Paramsukh (P.W.-2) is that he along with his wife Smt. Kishan Pyari Devi aged about 55 years, his two daughters namely "V" aged about 16 years and Thanwati aged about 13 years and his son Ved Prakash aged about 10 years reached the brick kilns of Ram Chandra Mukhiya on 19.10.1994 at about 5.00 p.m. in the presence of Ram Singh Contractor, on which Ram Singh Contractor left him and his family members under the supervision of watchman Sherpal. After the contractor left the place, the first informant said to the watchman that his family will not be secured at the kiln and they be sent to the house of the owner but the watchman assured him that in an hour labours will come. The first informant pleaded many times to the watchman and later on went to his hut. Subsequently after sometime at about 7.00 p.m. three persons came to the hut and showed the first informant a country made pistol and directed him that he should call his family members out, otherwise they will burn the hut. It is further stated that the first informant then shouted for the watchman, who then went to the back side and the said persons then took his whole family along with himself to a field of paddy near the brick kiln. The first informant, his wife and his daughter were tied to a tree and about 8 meters away from the place and his elder daughter "V" aged about 16 years was then raped by the said three persons, which was witnessed by them helplessly as they were tied to the tree. It is further stated that out of the said persons he identified two of them, who are namely Thakur Pappu S/o Chintar Pal and Pandit Pappu S/o Babu Lal Sharma R/o Mulla Pada, Bhujpura and the third person was unknown. It is further stated that after about 30 minutes of the incident, the younger daughter of the first informant Km. Thanwati untied them. It is then stated that later on, the said incident was informed to the owner of the brick kiln, who told them that he will inform the police and he may not lodge any report, but since he did not take any action then he has come to lodge the present first information report.