RAJWINDER SINGH ALIAS RAJU Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE compendium of the facts and evidence, unfolded during the course of trial, culminating in the commencement, relevant for deciding the instant appeal and emanating from the record, as claimed by the prosecution, is that the prosecutrix (name withheld) (PW4) minor girl aged about 13 years, daughter of Harbhajan Singh, was a student of 6th class. On 12.12.2000, complainant Palo Bai (PW3) (mother of prosecutrix) (for brevity "the complainant ") was busy in the marriage of her relative. The prosecutrix and her younger sister Baljinder Kaur (PW8) (aged 11 years) had gone near Harijan colony (an abandoned place) at the outskirts of the village to answer the call of nature. As soon as, they were returning at about 3 P.M. after answering the call of nature and reached near Harijan colony, in the meantime, appellant -convict Rajwinder Singh alias Raju son of Kulwant Singh (for short "the appellant ") met them on the way (spot). He gripped the prosecutrix in his arms and forcibly took her in a house situated near Harijan colony, in spite of hue and cry raised by both the sisters. Thereafter, he committed forcible rape with her against her consent. Her younger sister Baljinder Kaur (PW8) rushed and narrated the entire episode to her mother (complainant). They went to the place of occurrence and noticed that the blood was oozing out of her (prosecutrix) private part and the appellant had already decamped from the spot. Although the matter was stated to have been reported, but the police did not take any action against the guilty. Then, the complainant moved a complaint dated 15.12.2000 (Ex.PD) to DSP, Sub Division, Baba Bakala. The influential persons of village put pressure on her (complainant) to compromise the matter. The appellant and his family members have also threatened them with dire consequences in case, they would take any action against him.

(2.) LEVELING a variety of allegations and narrating the sequence of events, in all, according to the prosecution that the appellant had committed the forcible rape with the prosecutrix against her wishes. In the background of these allegations and in the wake of complaint (Ex.PD) of the complainant, the present criminal case was registered against the appellant, vide FIR No.169 dated 23.12.2000 (Ex.PD/2), on accusation of having committed an offence punishable u/s 376 IPC by the police of Police Station Kathunangal, District Amritsar in the manner depicted here -in -above.

(3.) HAVING completed all the codal formalities, the appellant was accordingly charge -sheeted for the commission of indicated offence. As he did not plead guilty and claimed trial, therefore, the case was slated for evidence of the prosecution by the trial Judge.