SUBHASH CHANDER Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 03.05.2008 and order of sentence dated 24.05.2008 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Sirsa vide which the appellant -accused - Subhash Chander has been convicted in FIR No. 50 dated 10.02.2006 for the offence under Sections 376 and 313 IPC registered at police station Rania, District Sirsa. He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years along with a fine of Rs. 5,000/ - under Section 376(2)(b) IPC and in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months. The prosecutrix, a child of 13 years and a student of 8th Class, was raped by the appellant, who was the Sanskrit teacher in the school. The child was being raped for over a period of 2/3 months. The prosecutrix is handicapped. She had participated in the Hammer Throw event held in Faridabad. The prosecutrix had also participated in the tournament held at the Haryana level, which took place on 02.12.2005 where she stood first. The prosecutrix along with other students remained in the school for 5 days during the tournament. The allegations were that the appellant took the child at mid night to an isolated room and raped her. The appellant also threatened her. After the tournaments were over, all the students returned to village Sadewala. The girl was under constant threat. She was raped twice in the school. The prosecutrix informed the accused that she had become pregnant and she would tell her family but the accused persuaded her not to inform anyone as it would bring disrepute to them. He promised to provide some medicines to abort the pregnancy. On the next day, the accused handed over her some medicines. The prosecutrix started vomiting after she returned home. Her mother took her to the doctor where she was informed the cause for the vomit. The matter was discussed in the family. The family went to report the matter to the police but they found 5 -7 persons already present. They asked them to compromise the matter as the reputation of the family was involved. The matter was subsequently reported. A formal FIR Ex. PA/1 was registered 10.02.2006. The statement of the prosecutrix was taken and she was medically examined. Report under Sections 376 -B, 313 and 506 IPC was laid. Charge was framed under Section 376(2)(b) IPC.

(2.) THE prosecution examined 15 witnesses including the prosecutrix, her father, the Medical Officers, the guest teachers and the police officials.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file with their assistance.