CHARANJIT Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction, and the order of sentence dated 4-8-1994, rendered by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, kapurthala, vide which it convicted charanjit son of Amar Nath, accused, (now appellant), as under :- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_2949_CRLJ_2009Html1.htm</FRM> The substantive sentences of the accused were ordered to run concurrently. However, surinder Kumar alias Chhinda accused was acquitted of the charge framed against him.

(2.) THE facts, in brief, are that, on the night intervening 4/5-9-1993, there was a religious function (Jagrata) in Mohalla mehtabgarh, arranged by Chintpurni Mata sewa Dal Committee, Kapurthala. At about 9. 30 p. m. Thakar Dass, along with his wife gurmit Kaur, son Amarjit Singh and daughter, the prosecutrix, (the name is not being mentioned in view of the pronouncement of the Apex Court), went to attend that function. The prosecutrix, at that time, was aged about 13 years. On the next morning, at about 7. 00 a. m. when the religious function (Jagrata) was over, Thakar Dass, along with his other family members, except the prosecutrix, came back to their house. The prosecutrix was found missing. Thakar Dass and his other family members tried to find out the prosecutrix from the neighbourhood, but she was not available. Thakar Dass, entertained a firm belief in his mind, that the prosecutrix was kidnapped by Charanjit, accused, who sometime earlier, was engaged by him, to work at his kabaria shop. It was further stated that Charanjit, accused, earlier to the incident, used to visit his maternal uncle Surinder Kumar alias Chhinda, accused, in New Grain Market, Kapurthala, where he was working as Palledar. Statement ex. PB on 11-9-1993, narrating the aforesaid facts, was made by Thakar Dass, complainant, before Balbir Singh, Assistant sub-Inspector, on the basis whereof, the formal fir Ex. PB/1 was registered. 2-A. During the course of investigation, the prosecutrix and Charanjit Singh were intercepted on 20-9-1993, at Bus Stand kapurthala, when they were alighting from a bus. They were taken into custody. Later on, the prosecutrix was got medico-legally examined. The prosecutrix disclosed that she was sitting in the congregation of the jagrata when accused Charanjit and surinder Singh alias Chhinda, (since acquitted)were standing at some distance. Charanjit made gestures to her and in response thereto, she went to them. Surinder singh alias Chhinda (since acquitted)suggested charanjit, accused, to take her for the purpose of performing marriage and by doing so to teach a lesson to her father, who had removed him from his service. It was further stated that Charanjit, accused, took her to a place near new grain market, kapurthala, where in a grove of Safaida trees, he committed rape with her. On the next day, she was taken to Jalandhar, where they stayed for a night. They came back to kapurthala, and at a place, near Guru nanak Stadium, she was again raped by charanjit, accused. Thereafter, she was taken to Sultanpur Lodhi, Kartarpur, Ropar and other places. It was further stated by her, that at all these places, he (Charanjit)continued committing rape with her. She further stated that thereafter they came back to Kapurthala, where on 20-09-1993, they were intercepted. The statements of the witnesses were recorded. Surinder Kumar alias chhinda, accused (since acquitted) was also arrested. After the completion of investigation, the accused were challaned.

(3.) ON their appearance, in the Committing court, the accused were supplied the copies of all the documents, relied upon by the prosecution. After the case was received by commitment, in the Court of Sessions, charge under Sections 120-B, 363 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, was framed against the accused, to which they pleaded not guilty, and claimed judicial trial.