OM PARKASH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a criminal appeal and has been directed against the judgment dated 15.11.1995, passed by the court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kaithal, who convicted the appellant u/ss 376 and 376 read with section 511, IPC, and sentenced him vide order dated 16.11.1995 to undergo R.I. for a period of 10 years in the charge u/s 376 and the appellant was directed to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-. The appellant was further directed to undergo R.I. for a period of three years u/s 376 read with section 511, IPC.

(2.) THE allegations in this case are quite startling when Santosh Kumari, the real daughter of the appellant has stated before the police vide her statement, Ex.PA, that her father used to do the work of Paledar. He used to waste his entire earnings on liquor. Her mother Panmeshwari Devi used to work as Labourer in Mandi. She had four sisters and two brothers. She was married about four years back to Dharam Pal son of Thapu Ram, resident of Deora, Police Station, Kaithal. She had gone to the house of her in-laws for 7/8 times. Now, for the last about one month, she had come to her parental house. It has been alleged by Santosh that 20 days back when her mother and her brothers and sisters had gone to the Mandi for doing the labour work, on that day, the appellant at about noon time, finding her alone in the room forcibly caught hold of her and committed rape upon her. She started raising noise but her father threatened her that in case she raised a noise, she would be killed. Out of fear and shame she kept quiet. It has been further alleged by the prosecutrix that on 4.6.1993, when her mother and her brothers and sisters had gone to the Mandi for doing labour work in the morning, she was alone in the house. At about 5 PM, her father Om Parkash, appellant, by taking the advantage of her loneliness caught hold of her with the bad intention and forcibly started untying the string of her salwar and closed the door of the room from inside. He broke open the string of the salwar and even put pressure upon her and he wanted to commit sexual intercourse with her but her mother Panmeshwari and her younger sister Seena came at the spot. He mother knocked the door from outside upon which her father opened the door and ran away from the place of occurrence. She narrated the entire matter to her mother. She accompanied by her mother and sister were going to the police station to lodge the report, but on the way the police met her and she made her statement, Ex.PA, before the Thanedar. The thanedar made endorsement underneath the said statement and it was sent to the police station for the registration of case, on the basis of which, formal FIR, Ex. PN, was recorded. Who started the investigation of this case is no more in the world but the evidence on the record reveals that immediately after recording the statement of the prosecutrix, he also took into possession the salwar with a broken string vide separate recovery memo. He recorded the statements of the witnesses. The prosecutrix was medically examined by the doctor. The appellant was arrested on 5.6.1993 and he was also sent for medical examination.

(3.) VIDE order dated 28.9.1993, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Kaithal, framed charges u/ss 376 and 376/511, IPC, against the appellant by stating in the charge that in the mother of May, 1993, in the area of City Kaithal, the appellant allegedly committed rape upon Santosh and subsequently on 4.6.1993, he attempted to commit rape upon the prosecutrix and, thus, allegedly was guilty for the offence u/ss 376 and 376/511, IPC, respectively. The charges were read over and explained to the appellant, who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.