KULDEEP KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT appeal has been preferred by Kuldeep Kaur challenging acquittal of respondent No. 2 - Gurpreet Singh of the charge of offence punishable under Sections 376 and 506 IPC vide judgment dated 11.07.2014 rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana.

(2.) PROSECUTION was set in motion on the statement, Ex.PA, of complainant Kuldeep Kaur to the effect that she was married to Sikander Singh about 14 years ago who has been staying in Italy for the last six years. They have a son aged about 10 years. Respondent - Gurpreet Singh, Harijan, resident of village, Rajgarh used to have an evil eye on her for the past two years. Gurpreet Singh used to ask her to develop physical relations with her otherwise he would cause harm to her and her son. She informed about this to Panch Bagga Singh and Panch Surinder Singh. They tried to make the respondent understand but he did not desist. She averred that she was present in her house on 28.02.2013 at about 7.15 a.m. She was cleaning her house when Gurpreet Singh scaled the wall of the house and came inside, put his hand on her mouth and pushed her into a room, forcibly broke the string of her salwar and raped her. Thereafter, he left her residence on opening the outer gate of her house while threatening to kill her. She raised alarm on which Bagga Singh, Panch came to her house. She revealed this incident to him. She went to the police station to reveal this incident alongwith Panches Surinder Singh and Bagga Singh on 04.03.2013. On the basis of this statement, formal FIR No. 26 dated 21.03.2013 (Ex. PW3/A) was registered. Respondent - Gurpreet Singh was arrested on 05.03.2013 and medically examined at Civil Hospital. Prosecutrix was also subjected to medical examination on 05.03.2013.

(3.) ON completion of investigation, report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was presented in Court against the said respondent. Charge was framed against Gurpreet Singh for the offence punishable under Sections 376 and 506 IPC on 08.04.2013. He pleaded innocence and claimed trial. Nine witnesses were examined by the prosecution to prove its case. While denying incriminating material put to him, respondent - Gurpreet Singh in his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. pleaded innocence and false implication. It was specifically averred that there were cordial relations between his family and the family of the prosecutrix, who had even attended his ring ceremony and marriage. Prosecutrix's husband lives in Italy and they had assured him to passage to Italy and taken Rs. 1,75,000/ - for the same. He was not sent to Italy. Consequently, he had been demanding back his money but the prosecutrix used to put him off on one pretext or the other. There was a quarrel between prosecutrix and his mother on 28.02.2013 at about 7.00 a.m. as his mother demanded money. They both were injured and medically examined at Civil Hospital, Payal. No rape was ever committed by him. He also stated that he was being implicated due to party faction. Surinder Singh and Bagga Singh belong to the Congress party and the prosecutrix was very close to them. Both the said Panches were annoyed with him as he supported the rival party. They in connivance with each other have sought to implicate him after due deliberation and consultation. He is happily married and lives with his family including his old parents. Four witnesses were examined in defence as well as placing certain documents on record.