BHIRA @ RAGHBIR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this judgment I dispose of two criminal appeals No. 596-SB (Bhira @ Raghbir v. State of Haryana) and 789-SB (Parvara Ram v. State of Haryana), both of 1996, as both the appeals have been directed against the judgment and order dated 13.8.1996, passed by the court of Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra, who convicted the appellants under Sections 387(1)(g), IPC, and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for a period of 10 years. The appellants were further directed to pay a fine of Rs. 250/-; in default in payment of fine, they were directed to undergo R.I. for 15 days.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the F.I.R., Ex. PF, was registered at the instance of Sunita Devi, PW-3, at Police Station, Shahabad, on 2.1.1996 at 1.30 P.M. wherein she stated that she was a resident of village Machhroli, and that her father Jeet Ram expired about 10/12 years ago and that here mother Pano Devi, PW-9, had brought her up. She had five brothers and sisters; two sisters and three brothers. He eldest sister is Salochana, followed by Santosh and she is the youngest. It has been further stated by the prosecutrix that her 3 brothers are younger to her and she and her sister Salochana were married together about 3 years ago as her mother was a poor lady and she could not spend on separate marriages. She further stated in the F.I.R., that after the marriage, she had not gone to the house of her in-laws and she was staying with her mother ever since then. She had been working with her mother as a labourer so as to earn livelihood. It is alleged by the prosecutrix that on the morning of 1.1.1996, she along with Shanti d/o Sardara Ram, caste Harijan, resident of Machhroli, went to the agricultural fields of Jodh Singh for cutting Toria crop. The said agricultural field adjoins the jungle. At about 4.30/5 P.M., after cutting the Toria crop, she had gone to the jungle to pick up woods and when she had covered a distance of 2/3 killas inside the jungle and was in the process of picking up woods, all of a sudden Parvara Ram so of Shankar Ram, resident of Machhroli and Bhira alias Raghbir son of Kashmira, caste Harijan, resident of Chanarthal, came there and forcibly secured her. Bhira caught hold of her and Parvara committed rape upon her and, thereafter, Parvara Ram gagged her mouth and caught hold of her and Bhira committed rape upon her. She further stated that she raised sufficient noise and after hearing her noise, Shanti and Harbhajan Singh, residents of Machhroli, who were working in the fields came there and rescued her. On seeing them, both the accused ran away from the place of occurrence and gave a threat that in case she told anybody about the incident, then she would be killed. After the incident, she narrated the entire story to her mother Pano Devi. Due to night and in the absence of conveyance, she could not report the matter to the police on that day. On then next day, she along with her mother and Sarpanch Gurmukh Singh went to the police station to lodge the report. The statement, Ex. PF, of the prosecutrix was recorded by PW-10 SI Sawan Singh at about 1.30 P.M. on 2.1.1996. He read over the statement to the prosecutrix, who thumb marked the same in token of its correctness. The offence was registered under Section 376, IPC. The case was investigated and both the accused were taken into custody. The medical examination of the prosecutrix was also conducted and on the completion of the investigation of the case, the appellants were challaned in the Court of the Illaqa Magistrate, who supplied the copies of the documents to the accused and vide commitment order dated 15.3.1996, committed the accused to the court of sessions to face trial under Section 376/506, IPC.

(3.) IN order to prove the charge, the prosecution examined PW-1 Dr. Anupma Singh, who medically examined the prosecutrix on 2.1.1996 at 6 P.M. At the time of her medical examination, the prosecutrix gave her age as 16 years. She was conscious, co-operative and the vital signs were normal. The menstrual history of the patient was that Menarche was attained three years back. Last menstruation period was approximately 15 days back. Secondary sex characters were developed. Breasts were hemi-spherical and had no mark of injury. On local examination, pubic hair were present and were taken for chemical examination. Labia majora and labia minora were developed and healthy. There was whitish discharge present on it, which was taken for chemical examination. Hymen was torn at 5, 10 and 11 O'clock. The tear at 5 O'clock position was fresh and bled to touch. Margins were swollen and tender. The doctor submitted, Ex. PB, the carbon copy of the MLR. At the time of the examination salwar of the prosecutrix was taken into possession besides slides and swabs. In the cross-examination, it has been deposed by this doctor that the duration of the tear at 5 O'clock position was within 24 hours and the possibility that the prosecutrix might have had intercourse prior to the present incident, could not be ruled out.