SATNAM SINGH @ SATTI Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant was tried for committing offences punishable under Sections 363, 366-A and 376 IPC with the allegations that he induced the prosecutrix, who was under the age of eighteen years to go from the place of her father so that he may seduce her for illicit relations and after so inducing her, he subjected the prosecutrix to rape. Vide judgment and order dated 30.8.2010, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozepur, convicted the appellant for the aforementioned offences and sentenced him as under:-

(2.) All the sentences of imprisonment were ordered to run concurrently. The period of detention already undergone by him during the trial of the case was ordered to be set off against the substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed upon him. The case of the prosecution, in nutshell, is that on 28.9.2008, when the prosecutrix, aged about 15 years, was sleeping on a cot, the appellant after inducing her, took her with him. The mother of the prosecutrix searched for the prosecutrix in the houses of her relatives and also in the house of the appellant but she could not find her daughter. Ultimately, on 22.10.2008, complainant-Resham Kaur, mother of the prosecutrix, got recorded her statement with ASI Surjit Singh, on the basis of which FIR No. 158 dated 22.10.2008 under Sections 363/366-A/376 IPC was registered against the appellant at Police Station Mamdot.

(3.) In support of its case, the prosecution examined the prosecutrix as PW1, her mother-Resham Kaur, complainant, as PW2 and Mohinder Singh, paternal uncle of the prosecutrix, as PW3, who deposed regarding the abduction of the prosecutrix by the appellant and about the appellant committing sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix against her wishes. The prosecution also examined PW4 Dr. Vanita, who deposed about the medico-legal examination of the prosecutrix and PW5 Dr. Pardeep Kumar Aggarwal, who testified about the medical examination of the appellant. The investigation part of the case was brought on record by the prosecution through the testimonies of PW6 HC Surjit Singh, PW7 HC Lakhwinder Singh, PW8 SI Jagdish Lal and PW9 ASI Surjit Singh. When examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. the appellant denied all the incriminating evidence brought on record by the prosecution and pleaded innocence. He stated that he neither abducted the prosecutrix nor subjected her to rape. The appellant, however, led no evidence in defence. The trial Court, after hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, believed the prosecution case and convicted and sentenced the appellant, as mentioned above. Hence, the present appeal.