BINDER Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is against the judgment of conviction dated 18.04.2003 and order of sentence dated 22.04.2003 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Panipat, whereby it convicted the appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 366, 354 and 302 IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- for an offence under Section 366 IPC; rigorous imprisonment for two years for an offence under Section 354 IPC and life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- for an offence under Section 302 IPC.

(2.) The prosecution case was set in motion on the basis of statement (Ex.PC) of Mam Chand son of Neki Ram recorded by SI Prithvi Raj on 23.1.1999. The statement is to the effect that he is working as labourer and has six children i.e. three sons and three daughters. Youngest is son Joginder, aged about 5/6 years; elder to him is daughter Reena, aged about 9/10 years; elder to her is son Anil, aged about 12/13 years. He has further stated that yesterday on 22.1.1999, his daughter Reena and two sons namely Anil and Joginder had gone to the house of his brother Gordhan to watch T.V. at about 10.30 PM. At about 11.00 PM, his daughter Reena came back, but he sent her back to call for his two sons. His sons Anil and Joginder came back to their house at about 12.30 AM after watching TV. He asked from them about Reena. They told him that Reena had already come much earlier. Thereafter, he alongwith his brother Gordhan went towards Dhindar Wala Johar in search of his daughter Reena and saw the dead body of Reena lying in one corner of the Johar. Salwar was tied in her neck. It was further stated that his daughter has been strangulated to death with the help of her salwar by some one and throw in the pond. After leaving his brother Gordhan near the dead body, when he was going to the Police Station, when SI Prithvi Raj met him. His statement was recorded at 1.00 PM. On the basis of such statement, an FIR was lodged at about 2.00 PM. The special report was received by the learned Magistrate at 3.25 PM on 23.1.1999.

(3.) The post-mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased was conducted by PW-12 Dr. Tejinder Kharbanda alongwith Dr. Jaya Goel. The post-mortem report is Ex.PR. As per the Doctor, the bleeding was present from vagina. There was fresh rupture of hymen found on examination and that the vagina admits one finger. The Doctor has taken vaginal swabs. The said Doctor has also examined the appellant on 31.1.1999. The medico-legal report in respect of the appellant is Ex.PS/1. It was concluded that the evidence did not suggest that the appellant could not perform the act of sexual intercourse. The report of the Forensic Science Laboratory is Ex.PT. As per the said report, semen could not be detected on Ex.1a (slides) and Ex.1b (Vaginal Swabs).