JIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) JIT Singh appellant alongwith Paramjit Singh co-accused was convicted for the offence under Section 376, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to three years' rigorous imprisonment and to ray fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for two months by learned Additional Sessions Judge Jullundur. The appellant has challenging in led his conviction and sentenced by way of this appeal.

(2.) THE prosecution case as disclosed by Smt. Balwinder Kaur prosecutrix is that her husband is serving in Army and she was residing in village Chitti with her mother-in-law, Smt. Channo P.W. and that she has got a son named Sukhdev Singh aged six years. On December 26, 1979 at about 11 A.M. she had gone out to the other side of the canal minor for bringing fodder from the fields and was going on the pucca road leading from village Singha. When she reached near potato field of Bhajan Singh both Jit Singh alias Surjit Singh, appellant and Paramit Singh co-accused came there and caught hold of her and took her to a nearby water-channel. Paran Jit Singh alias Pammi accused gagged her mouth and caught hold of her by both of her arms while Jit Singh appellant removed her salwar forcibly and committed rape upon her. Thereafter, At Singh appellant caught hold of her from both her arms while Paramjit Singh accused committed rape upon her. She raised an alarm which attracted her mother-in-law Smt. Channo P.W. and Thakar Singh resident of village Chitti and on their arrival both the appellant and his co-accused ran away along with their clothes. During the struggle with the appellant, the clothes of the prosecutrix were also torn. After the occurrence both she and Smt. Channo returned home weeping. There Suchet Singh father of Jit Singh appellant along with other persons came to their house and tried to compromise and did not Allow them to go to the Police Station for lodging the report regarding the incident.

(3.) THE prosecutrix was examined by Dr. (Mrs.) Sushma Chawala, ( P.W.1) on December 3 1, 1979. Her medico-legal report is Ex. P.A. She found no external mark of injury on her body or private parts. Two swabs and two slides were prepared and sent for examination of semen but vide Examiner's report Ex. PB, no spermatozoa was found. In her opinion, from the clinical examination, the possibility of rape could not be ruled.