STATE OF HARYANA Vs. DALIP SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vide his judgment dated 27.4.1981 and order dated 28.4.1981, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hissar, acquitted the respondent of the charge of rape and found that the allegations of the prosecution regarding the illegal detention of Chhinder Pal Kaur P.W. 4 in his custody were well founded and on that basis ordered the respondent to be released on probation for a period of two years and to execute a bond in the sum of Rs. 5000/- with one surety in the like amount undertaking therein that the respondent shall keep peace and be of good behaviour during the said period and in case he fails to abide by the conditions of the bond he shall appear before the Court to receive sentence in accordance with law. The respondent was also ordered to pay Rs. 500/- as litigation expenses.

(2.) The State of Haryana has filed Criminal Appeal No. 600 - DBA of 1981 against the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned trial Judge and the respondent has filed Criminal Appeal No. 321- DSB of 1981 against the order under which he was kept on probation for a period of two years. Since the two appeals arise out of the same incident, they are being disposed of by this judgment.

(3.) Chhinder Pal Kaur P.W. 4 was married to one Karnail. At the material time she was living with her parents at village TaIwan. On 24.3.1980 she had gone to the fields of one Jangir Lambardar to pick up grass from there in the morning. Her father Sapura P.W. 17 was working as a sin with the said Lambardar. One Prem was working as a servant of the said Jangir Lambardar. Prem approached her and told her that he would feed her properly and would also give her good clothes. He made her sit on a bicycle and took her to Tohana. From Tohana, she was taken to Kalan and then to Dhamtanwali and Narwana. According to Chhinder Pal Kaur P.W. 4, the said Prem used to commit rape upon her. On the night of 27th and 28th of March, 1980, police party headed by the respondent organised a raid and recovered this witness from village Gangoa from the residence of maternal grand-father of the said Prem. The respondent brought her to Police Post, Jakhal, and kept her there for two days. Even though the relations of the young girl and Raj Kumar P.W. 7, who was a Youth Congress (1) worker, had been approaching him and asking him to release the girl but he declined to do so. According to Chhinder Pal Kaur P.W. 4 she was being taken to the room of the respondent at night time. On the first day, the respondent had pistol in his hands. He committed rape upon her and told her that she would be shot dead in case she talked about this matter to anybody else. It is in the evidence of Raj Kumar P. W. 7 and Sapura P.W. 17, father of the young girl, that the Panchayat wanted to leave her mother in the police post to give the prosecutrix company but the respondent told them that they could leave some male member at the police post. Accordingly, Rangi P.W. 18 was left in the police post. The last mentioned witness has stated that the respondent would tell him to go and sleep in the police post or Dharamsala and he did not allow him to talk to Chhinder Pal Kaur P.W 4. On the third day the young girl cried before him and told him that the respondent had been committing rape upon her for the last two nights. Thereafter, Rangi P.W. 18 mentioned this fact to the Panchayat and the young lady was produced before the Deputy Superintendent of Police and the Senior Superintendent of Police. An application Ex. PC on her behalf was drafted by Ram Kumar Pandit on the basis of which the present prosecution was launched against the respondent.