LAWS(P&H)-2013-8-899

KOMAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA & ANOTHER

Decided On August 23, 2013
KOMAL Appellant
V/S
State Of Haryana And Another Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant -prosecutrix is in appeal aggrieved against the judgment dated 06.02.2013 rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Panipat acquitting respondent No. 2 - Robin @ Randeep of the charges for the offences punishable under Sections 366A & 376 IPC. The appellant moved a complaint on 12.12.2010 to the effect that her mother left her (prosecutrix) with her brother, as she had gone to attend marriage. The leg of the prosecutrix had been operated upon due to which her leg was aching. On 11.12.2010 at about 9.00 PM, she went to Sai Medical Store to purchase medicines, where one boy i.e. respondent No. 2 was present, who asked her to get her checked through lady Doctor, who was present at his home. After reaching home, respondent No. 2 told her that the lady Doctor was present in the room on the first floor. When she went on the first floor, respondent No. 2 followed her and made her to fall on the bed. Thereafter, respondent No. 2 committed rape with her forcibly. She could not rise due to pain in her leg and that when she shouted; respondent No. 2 left her and fled away. She disclosed the incident to her cousin, who telephonically informed and called her mother. She claims her date of birth as 14.08.1993. On the basis of such complaint, FIR was lodged at Police Station City, Panipat.

(2.) THE prosecutrix was medico -legally examined at General Hospital, Panipat on 12.12.2010. Her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Panipat on the same day. The parcels handed over by the Doctor were deposited in the Forensic Science Laboratory, Madhuban for examination, the report of which was received on 27.01.2011. Respondent No. 2 was arrested on 15.06.2011 and got medico -legally examined at General Hospital, Panipat. After completing the other formalities, report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was prepared and presented before the Court.

(3.) THE mother of the prosecutrix namely Meenakshi @ Chanchal appeared as PW -4 and deposed that she has three children. The prosecutrix was her younger daughter, aged 17 years and that she has gone to attend the marriage of her relative at Kalandar Chowk, Panipat while leaving the prosecutrix with her nephew namely Arjun @ Amar at Green Park, Panipat. She further deposed that the prosecutrix has been operated upon in Gandhi Hospital, Panipat as rods were removed from her legs 15 -20 days prior to the occurrence. She deposed that due to pain in leg, prosecutrix went to take medicine along with daughter of Arjun @ Amar, aged about 6 -7 years.