CHAND SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The matrix of the facts & 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 on 02.07.2000, the prosecutrix(name intentionally withheld) had gone to Mata Mansa Devi Temple, Panchkula, for paying obeisance along with her other relatives. Appellant-Chand Singh son of Umed Singh(for brevity "the appellant") was working as a Driver in Haryana Roadways. After reaching the bus stand, all boarded, but the prosecutrix alighted from the bus and stated that she would come to home in another bus. They reached at home at about 4.00 PM, but the prosecutrix reached home at 5/5.30 PM. Her mother complainant-Prem Lata(PW4)(for short "the complainant") asked her the reason for delay, reprimanded and gave two slaps to her. Thereafter, she had gone to sleep.

(2.) The case of the prosecution further proceeds that on 03.07.2000 at about 6.00 PM, when the complainant had returned back from Bhushan Industries, then she found the prosecutrix missing from her house. She was stated to have gone somewhere in anger/distress, as the complainant had reprimanded and slapped her on the previous evening. She searched for her in relations, but in vain. Subsequently, the complainant suspected that the prosecutrix might have been allured by the appellant. During the course of investigation, the prosecutrix was found by the police on 14.07.2000 in the house of her cousin brother Raj Kumar(PW5). Her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded by the CJM, Panchkula, wherein she has stated that the appellant had kidnapped her and repeatedly committed sexual intercourse against her wishes. The appellant was stated to have also threatened her with dire consequences, in case, the matter was reported anywhere.

(3.) Levelling a variety of allegations and narrating the sequence of events, in all, the prosecution claimed that the appellant has kidnaped the prosecutrix with the intent to compel her to marry with him and committed sexual intercourse. In the background of these allegations and in the wake of complaint(Ex.PM) of the complainant, the present case was registered against the appellant, vide FIR No.239 dated 05.07.2000, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376 and 506 IPC, by the police of Police Station Sector 5, Panchkula, in the manner described here-in-above.