STATE OF H P Vs. LATTU RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Criminal Appeal has come up for adjudication after the grant of leave to appeal under Section 378(3) of the Code of criminal Procedure in reference to judgment dated 22.11.1996, passed by the Learned Sessions Judge, Kinnaur, Sessions Division Rampur Bushahar, H.P., in Sessions Trial No. 40-R/7 of 1995, under Section 368/376 of the Indian Penal Code, acquitting the alleged accused/respondent.

(2.) In order to adjudicate the present criminal appeal, it is necessary to give the factual background of the case. On 7.9.1994, the victim/prosecutrix (PW. 1) [name not given], was working as volunteer teacher in Government Primary School, Kanai, while going back to her village after school hours with Sonam Dorje, accused Lattu Ram, a Forest Guard also came from behind. The accused started talking with the prosecutrix about the death of his son which the victim/prosecutrix was hearing. The accused caught hold of the victim/prosecutrix for committing sexual intercourse with her, however, victim/prosecutrix freed her from the clutches of the accused. The headmaster had again gone ahead and victim/prosecutrix tried to take help of the headmaster, but the accused again caught hold of her taking the benefit of darkness and committed sexual assault with her by taking her in the Nullah. The accused gave her one golden ring alongwith the bunch of keys of his house and told her that she become his wife. Whereupon, the victim/prosecutrix refused to accept the keys and told that she is already married but the accused told her that he is not having good relation with his wife because she is the common wife of his brother and the accused. The victim/prosecutrix did not disclose such incident to her parents. On 8.9.1994, in the morning when she was going to school, accused asked her to come after taking meal and in the evening when she was returning from the school, accused also met the victim/prosecutrix. The victim/prosecutrix had narrated the entire incident to her brother and father. Her father become furious and asked her to leave his house, as such, the victim/prosecutrix had gone to the house of her maternal aunt in village Talangi. On 15.9.1994, she was taken to Sangla by Bharat, who is related to her brother. Her brother Ishwar Singh, accused Lattu Ram and Pardhan Gram Panchayat, Sapni, were present in the quarter of Bharat, where accused accepted the victim/prosecutrix as his wife and indicated everything in writing. The victim/prosecutrix was taken by the accused in the evening and kept in the house of some relative at Karchham. Thereafter, accused did not return to that place, as such, the victim/prosecutrix reported the matter to the police.

(3.) The accused was charged for the offences under Section 368/376 of the Indian Penal Code and the case was committed to Sessions Court. In order to prove its case, the prosecution has examined as many as 14 prosecution witnesses. Whereas, the accused through his statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., has denied the prosecution case.