GOPI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal has been filed against the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Narnaul in Sessions Case No.14 of 2002 decided on 23.2.2005. By the impugned judgment, the accused appellants Gopi, Ajay, Rajesh and Vicky alias Vikrant have been held guilty and convicted for having committed rape upon Rajni and thereafter having committed her murder by intentionally causing her death under section 302 and section 376(2)(g) read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. By a separate order dated 26.2.2005, all the accused were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Additionally, all the accused were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence under section 376 (2)(g) read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It was also ordered that the sentences awarded to the accused/appellants would run concurrently.

(2.) Appeal bearing No.494-DB of 2005 has been filed by the accused/appellants Gopi, Ajay and Rajesh and Criminal Appeal No.585-DB of 2005 has been filed by the accused/appellant Vicky through jail. As both the appeals have arisen out of one and the same order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, we shall dispose of the same collectively through the instant order.

(3.) The prosecution version of the incident is based on the complaint made by Gurbachan Singh PW6 father of Rajni to ASI Kailash Chand PW1 on 22.3.2002 at 11.30 A.M. wherein he stated that he has two daughters namely Rajni aged 14/15 years and Neetu aged 10 years. As per the complainant Gurbachan Singh PW6, his wife Nirmala died about five years ago. In his complaint Gurbachan Singh PW6 stated that on the night of 21.3.2002, he had gone to sleep after taking his meals at about 10:00 P.M. His two daughters Rajni and Neetu along with the daughter of his brother (Leela Ram PW11) Veena, along with the mother of the complainant Lakshmi, were all sleeping together in one room. It was asserted by Gurbachan Singh PW6 that his mother woke up at about 1.30 A.M. in order to urinate. Having woken up, she found that the outer door of the house was open. Through the window she saw a man going on the street. Accordingly the complainant's mother Lakshmi, woke up the complainant Gurbachan Singh PW6, as well as the complainant's brother Leela Ram PW11, and informed them that the outer door of the house was open, and that, she has seen a man going on the street. Thereupon, the complainant Gurbachan Singh PW6, as well as, his brother Leela Ram PW11 went out into the street but found no one there. They accordingly returned to the house. After some time the younger daughter of the complainant Gurbachan Singh PW6 i.e. Neetu told the complainant as also his brother Leela Ram PW11, that Rajni was not lying on her bed. Finding Rajni missing, the complainant Gurbachan Singh PW6 called his relatives, and went out to search for his daughter Rajni. He claims to have searched for her in all nooks and corners of the city, including the bus stand, railway station, and the canal, but could not find her anywhere. Some student of Vidya Niketan High School told the searching party, that the body of a girl was lying in the street leading to Moti School. On receiving the aforesaid information, the complainant Gurbachan Singh PW6 along with his brother Leela Ram PW11, went to the said street and found the dead body of his daughter Rajni. The "salwar" of his daughter Rajni had been tied and wrapped around her neck. Her private parts had been eaten by some animal. On the question of suspicion on any particular individual having abducted and murdered his daughter, and thereafter having thrown her on the street is concerned, the complainant Gurbachan Singh PW6 asserted that he had no enmity with anybody, nor did he suspect anyone. On the basis of the aforesaid complaint, a First Information Report bearing No.84 was registered at Police Station Mahendergarh on 23.2.2002 at 11.40 A.M.