MAHIPAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The accused/appellant Mahipal has directed the present appeal against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 18/19.07.2003 passed by Shri Deepak Gupta, Additional Sessions Judge, Rewari, vide which the accused/ appellant has been found guilty under Section 376 read with Section 511 of the Indian Penal Code (in short the IPC ) and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/-. In default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months.

(2.) Briefly stated, the law was set in motion by filing a complaint by Satish Kumar s/o Roshan Lal (father of the prosecutrix) in which he has mentioned that he is resident of village Bhatsana and he used to work at Dharuhera. On 05.05.2002, his daughter aged about 10 years and one Deepak s/o Dharampal were taken by accused to his tubewell where he made both of them to take bath. Thereafter the prosecutrix was taken inside the room of the tubewell. When the wife of complainant namely Savita came to know about prosecutrix and Deepak, she went there. She saw that accused was lying naked on the prosecutrix, who had also been made naked and was doing bad act. On seeing Savita, accused ran away. On the basis of the said complaint, formal FIR was registered. Investigation was carried out. The accused was arrested and after completion of investigation, challan against the accused was presented in Court.

(3.) On presentation of challan, copies of same were supplied to the accused free of costs, as envisaged under Section 207 Cr.P.C. Thereafter, the case was committed to the Court of Session as the offence under Section 376 IPC was exclusively triable by the Court of Session. Charge under Sections 376 read with Section 511 IPC was framed against the accused to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.