MOHAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal out of the following facts :- Narinder Kaur, the prosecutrix, was married to Gurbachan Singh about 20/22 years prior to the date of the incident and out of that marriage, three sons, Prem Singh then aged 17 years, Balwinder Singh 15 years and Sukhwant Singh 13 years had been born. The prosecutrix had, however, been ill for about 5-6 years and despite efforts to get her treated for her ailment, no improvement had taken place. The accused, Mohan Singh, who was a Tantrik was accordingly approached for help. On 28.7.1989, Mohan Singh came to the house of the prosecutrix and told her that as a part of the treatment, he would perform a Havan which would continue for three days. The prosecutrix was also directed to provide the Havan Samgri as per the demands made by him. The Havan was accordingly started and after the first day, Mohan Singh left for his home and returned the next morning to continue with the proceedings. The accused returned again on the third day and performed the Havan in the presence of Gurbachan Singh, Narinder Kaur's husband. The Havan continued till about 3/4.00 P.M. after which certain articles were handed over by Mohan Singh to Gurbachan Singh and he was told to throw them at a distance of 20 killas from the house. As directed, Gurbachan Singh left the room after shutting the door. The accused thereafter caught hold of the prosecutrix and committed rape on her. On her alarm Mangal Kaur, who was living in an adjoining room, came rushing to the spot. Mohan Singh thereupon left the prosecutrix, but before doing so tied certain strings on her abdomen and arm, with the result she allegedly became unconscious and remained so for 5/6 days. On Gurbachan Singh's return home he found that his wife was unconscious, on which he went to village Makhu Majra to call Mohan Singh, but he refused to help out. Narinder Kaur regained consciousness on 4.8.1989 and at that stage disclosed as to what had happened. A report was thereafter lodged on 8.8.1989 at 3.30 p.m. The accused was arrested and on the completion of the investigation, was charged for an offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and as he pleaded not guilty, was brought to trial.

(2.) TO substantiate its allegations, the prosecution examined PW-2 Lady Dr. Mithlesh Rano, who had medically examined the prosecutrix on 8.8.1989 and opined that rape could have been committed on her; PW-3 Narinder Kaur, the prosecutrix; PW-5 Gurbachan Singh, her husband; and PW-6 ASI Banarsi Singh, the Investigating Officer. Mangal Kaur was, however, given up as won over.

(3.) THE trial Court, on a consideration of the evidence, held that there was no reason to disbelieve the evidence of the prosecutrix, which had been fully corroborated by her husband. The Court observed that the delay in the lodging of the FIR stood explained as the prosecutrix had remained unconscious upto 4.8.1989. It was also observed that the defence story projected by the accused clearly showed that he had admittedly visited the house of the prosecutrix and in that eventuality, this again was a corroborative circumstance. The trial Court accordingly convicted the accused under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. Hence this appeal.