RAJIN @ LILLU @ ANIL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Although, learned counsel for the appellant has chosen to remain absent, however, with the assistance of the learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, I have gone through the judgment passed by the Sessions Judge, Rewari and the record.

(2.) It is not in dispute that the appellant and prosecutrix are resident of the same village. It is further not in dispute that the defence had produced on file photographs Ex.D2 and Ex.D3 where appellant-accused and the prosecutrix have got themselves photographed jointly. The defence had also produced on file allegedly letters written by the prosecutrix which are Ex.D4, Ex.D5, Ex.D6, Ex.D7, Ex.D8. These letters were duly put to the prosecutrix. However, she denied having written these letters.

(3.) The prosecutrix first submitted an application to the police which is Ex.PJ on the file. It has been mentioned by her that she was to go to Rohtak and for that purpose, she was going on foot to the bus stop to catch a bus. At that time, the appellant-Rajan @ Rajin started walking with her and enquired as to where she was going. On that, the prosecutrix disclosed that she was going to Rohtak. The appellant also stated that he was also going to Rohtak and that is how they boarded the bus which was going to Rewari. It is stated in the application, contents whereof have been admitted by the prosecutrix in the evidence that the appellant came and sat with her and started talking and thereafter he lured her away to Gurgaon, another city. However, when the prosecutrix was produced before the Judicial Magistrate, she made a statement that she boarded the bus, Rajin was sitting on a seat behind her and thereafter he came and sat with her and he extended threat to me to accompany him otherwise appellant shall kill her father and other family members.