STATE OF HIMACHAL PRESESH Vs. SURINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) For an offence, which is alleged to have been committed on 25.1.1995, accused were put to trial. In terms of judgment dated 30.11.1998 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Shimla in Sessions trial No. 16-S/7 of 1997, titled as State of H.P. versus Surinder Singh and another, the accused stands acquitted of the charged offence.

(2.) It is the case of the prosecution that on 25.1.1995 accused Surinder Singh was driving vehicle No. HIS 9198 in which Whether reports of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? co-accused Baljeet Singh was sitting. At about 5.15 p.m. when the vehicle reached near the bus stop at Chhota Shimla they noticed the prosecutrix waiting for a bus to go to Dhalli. The accused persons stopped the jeep and offered her lift on the pretext that they were also going to Sanjauli. She boarded the vehicle. After some time she realized that instead of taking the vehicle directly to Sanjauli through the normal route the jeep was diverted on a different route through the Raj Bhawan. She wanted to get down from the vehicle but was not allowed to do so. However at a lonely place, a little ahead of the PWD Rest House, Chhota Shimla the accused stopped the vehicle. There accused Baljeet Singh who was sitting on the front seat came at the back and started teasing the prosecutrix. He also kept his hand on her shoulder. She resisted his advances and in the scuffle her shirt and sweater was torn. She also lost her currency notes of Rs. 450/- and a golden locket. She somehow managed to free herself and jump out of the vehicle. Thereafter she came to the Post Office, Chhota Shimla and narrated the incident to Sh. Ramesh Kumar and Sh. Bhaskra Nand and then subsequently to her husband at Dhalli. On 26.1.1995 she got F.I.R. Ext. PW1/A registered with Police Station East, Shimla under Sections 382 and 354 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Investigation was carried out by the police and the vehicle and the accused persons were also got identified. With the completion of investigation challan was presented in the Court for trial.

(3.) The accused were charged for having committed offences punishable under Sections 366, 382, 354 all read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, to which they did not plead guilty and claimed trial. In all prosecution examined nine witnesses and the statements of the accused under Section 313 Cr. P.C. were also recorded. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Shimla acquitted the accused of the charged offences.