SATBIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 17.10.2003 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Panipat, whereby the appellant was convicted under Section 376 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/ -. In default of payment of fine, he was directed to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. The period of detention already undergone by him during the investigation and the trial was ordered to set off against the period of sentence awarded to him.

(2.) THE prosecution case, in nutshell, is that on 2.12.2002, the prosecutrix, alongwith her husband, appeared before SI Atma Ram and got recorded her statement that she had three daughters and her husband was a cloth merchant. On 1.12.2002, her husband was away to U.P. to buy cloth. She went to Yamuna Tapu Goela Khurd to seek blessings of a Saint so that she may give birth to a son. On her way back, she came across the appellant, who belonged to her village. The appellant gagged her mouth and forcibly took her to the sugarcane field. He removed her salwar and committed rape upon her. Her shirt was torn. When she raised an alarm, the appellant ran away. She returned to her house but did not narrate the occurrence to anybody. However, when her husband returned, she apprised him about the occurrence.

(3.) IN support of its case, the prosecution examined the prosecutrix as PW -11, who deposed about the commission of rape upon her by the appellant. The husband of the prosecutrix also appeared as PW -9 and stated that when he had returned from U.P at about 8.00 PM on 1.12.2002, his wife told him about the appellant having subjected her to forcible sexual intercourse. He further testified that on the next day he, alongwith his wife, appeared before SI Atma Ram and the statement of his wife was recorded. His statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C was also recorded. He identified the appellant, who was his neighbour and used to work as a mason. PW -5 Rakesh Kumar, Halqa Patwari, proved scaled site plan Ex.PE of the place of occurrence, which he had prepared on 17.12.2002 at the instance of the prosecutrix. PW -8 Dr.Jai Parkash testified that he medically examined the appellant on 6.12.2002 and found that there was nothing to suggest that he was not capable of performing sexual intercourse. PW -12 Dr. Divya Mangla testified that on 2.12.2002, she medico -legally examined the prosecutrix and found abrasions over her chest, breasts and lower limbs. Her shirt was torn. In her opinion, the prosecutrix had been subjected to rape. Apart from the above, the prosecution examined PW -1 C.Surender Singh, PW -2 ASI Randhir Singh, PW -3 HC Ram Kumar, PW -4 ASI Ramesh Chand, PW -6 C.Rajbir Singh, PW -7 HC Rajpal and PW -10 SI Atma Ram, who testified about the various steps taken by them during the investigation of the case.