JAGDISH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal filed by Jagdish son of Om Parkash directed against the judgment and the order of sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Panipat dated 17.11.1994. By virtue of the impugned judgment, the learned trial court held the appellant guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 363/376 and 506 Indian Penal Code. By the subsequent order of sentence for the offence punishable under Section 363 IPC, the appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and a fine of Rs. 50/-. In default of payment of fine, he was to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for 3 months. For the offence punishable under Section 376 IPC, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and a fine of Rs. 100/-. In default of payment of fine he was to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for 6 months. Lastly for the offence punishable under Section 506 IPC, the appellant was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. The substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) THE relevant facts are that Siri Pal father of the prosecutrix is a cobbler by profession. On 5.5.1993 at about 8.00 A.M. he left his house to go to Jawahar Market for the repair of the shoes. He has six daughters. Prosecutrix Km. Pushpa is the eldest amongst his daughters. The wife of Siri Pal Smt. Rajeshwari also left the house for doing the labour work in Adarsh Factory. At about 10.00 A.M. Km. Pushpa was cleaning the drain outside the house. The appellant was his neighbour. He came there and gagged her mouth with a piece of cloth. He took her forcibly to his house. She was made to lie on a cot and the appellant raped her. He threatened her that if she told anything to any person, then she would be murdered. After the incident, the prosecutrix was returning to her house. On the way she met her aunt Kaila Devi. The entire incident was reported to her. Smt. Kaila Devi went to the house of the appellant and reprimanded him. The appellant again threatened her that in case she reports the matter to the police, she would be murdered. The parents of the prosecutrix returned in the evening. The entire episode was narrated to them. When Siri Pal father of the prosecutrix was taking her to the police station for making a report with the police, ASI Daya Nand met them at Lal Batti Chowk, Panipat. He recorded the statement of Siri Pal, on the basis of which formal First Information Report was recorded by ASI Ajit Singh. Statement of the prosecutrix was also recorded.

(3.) THE learned trial court framed a charge against the appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 363/376/506 IPC. The appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined 15 witnesses comprising of Dr. Abha Bhawan PW-7, Siri Pal father of the prosecutrix PW.9, Km. Pushpa the prosecutrix herself as PW.10, Smt. Kaila Devi PW.11 besides Harpal PW.12. After the prosecution closed its evidence, the statement of the appellant in terms of Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded. The prosecution evidence was put to him in the form of different questions. It was denied by the appellant that he has any hand in the incident. The prosecutrix was described to be 19 or 20 years of age. As per the appellant uncle of the prosecutrix had strained relations with the father of the appellant. At his behest, the father of the prosecutrix got a case falsely registered against the appellant. No evidence in defence was produced.