HARISHCHANDRA VASUDEO VAITY Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a horrendous case in which the accused has raped a five year old girl only to settle a score with the father of the girl. The innocent girl has become a hapless victim of the ire of the accused. Apparently, the provocation for this heinous act is political rivalry between the girl's father and the accused. This is a classic example of how vendetta and rage can bring out the beast in man.

(2.) The complainant, PW-1 has stated in her deposition before the Court that on 25. 10. 1996, she had left her house at 7 O'clock in the morning. When she returned at 6 O'clock in the evening she found the victim in the bathroom. The victim told her that she was suffering from pain in the abdomen. The complainant lifted her up and noticed blood stains on her underwear. The victim informed her that Deepa's father i. e. , the accused called her to his house telling her that he would give her some fish. The victim told her that the accused was alone at home. This witness has disclosed that the victim told her that the accused closed the door, spread out the quilt and made her lie down on it. He removed her underwear and lay down on her. The victim then told her that the accused "had done bad thing with her". The complainant on examining the private parts of her daughter noticed a swelling and bleeding. When her husband returned home after fishing, she narratad the incident to her husband. Her mother-in-law also learnt of the incident and immediately thereafter accosted the accused. Her mother-in-law questioned the accused about his conduct with the victim, whereupon the accused assaulted her. A complaint was lodged by her with the Virar Police Station. Her daughter was referred for medical examination and then the next day she was examined by the doctor in the Civil Hospital, Thane. Her daughter was admitted in hospital for 10 days. The underwear of her daughter was seized by the police. The credibility of this witness has not been shaken despite the searching cross-examination she was subjected to.

(3.) The victim has been examined as pw-2. The victim was about 9 years old when her testimony was recorded in Court. She has deposed about the incident and the pain and suffering that she was subjected to. This witness has admitted that there were quarrels between her father and the accused and that she did not talk to the accused. She has also stated that her brothers never visited the house of the accused. She has spoken about the fact that she was alone when the accused enticed her into his house. She has denied the suggestion put to her in cross-examination that she had sustained an injury on her private parts when she fell on a hard and rough object.