SUNEHRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SUNEHRA Singh was convicted under sections 376 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (II), Jind and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for four years and a fine of Rs 500/- or in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for six months under the former charge and R.I. for three years and a fine of Rs. 500/- or in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for six months under the latter charge. The substantive sentences have been directed to run concurrently. It has also been directed that out of the fine, if recovered, Saneh Prabha prosecutrix be paid Rs. 900/-. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant has filed this appeal.

(2.) THE prosecution case is that in the year 1982 Harbans Lal (PW4), father of Saneh Prabha, prosecutrix (PW5), was posted as a teacher at Government School, Khunga Kothi. Accused Sunehra Singh was also working as a chowkidar in that school in those days. Due to this, the accused used to visit the house of Harbans Lal and started taking fancy of Sneh Prabha. His visits resulted in his intimacy with her. Harbans Lal use to reside at Patiala Chowk, Jind, during those days. On 5-8-1982 when he and his wife, who was also a teacher, had gone on their duties the appellant came to their house at about 11 a.m., and asked the prosecutrix to accompany him to the bus stand. On enquiry by her, he told that life at Jind was not good. While accompanying him, the prosecutrix took Rs. 2,000/-. cash, gold ornaments, attachi case and a number of clothes with her. They went in a rickshaw to the bus stand from where they boarded a bus for Delhi and from Delhi, they went to Rajgarh (Madhya Pradesh) by train. At Raigarh, the appellant rented a house belonging to Ganesh Ram (PW 11) at Rs. 20/- per month and started, residing their with Saneh Lata. During their stay in that house, the appellant committed sexual intercourse with Saneh Prabha almost daily, which, according to her, was against the her wishes.

(3.) THE appellant has been convicted under sections 376 and' 366 of the Indian Penal Code. According to Sneh Prabha, rape was committed on her in Raigarh. There in no allegation that any rape was committed on her at Jind or anywhere in Haryana. His conviction under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code cannot be maintained, as there is no allegation of any rape in the Jind district. He is acquitted of the charge under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.