PUSHAP RAJ Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellants/accused/convicts (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused persons') laying challenge to judgment dated 02.05.2017, rendered by learned Special Judge, Kinnaur Sessions Division at Rampur Bushahr, H.P., in Sessions Trial No. 0000079 of 2015, whereby the accused persons were convicted.

(2.) Tersely, the facts of the case, leaving the fiddling details, are summarized as under:- In an unfortunate incident of sexual assault, the accused persons ravished the victim/prosecutrix (name withheld). As per the prosecution, on 23.02.2015, the prosecutrix, a student of 8th class and aged 13 years, returned home from the school and she all alone, as her father had gone to Kotkhai, in connection to earn livelihood, and her grand- parents were away to Kakardhar. Around 7 p.m., both the accused persons entered into the room of the prosecutrix, switched off the light and one after another committed rape on the prosecutrix, thereafter, they fled away from the spot. On the subsequent morning, when an elder parental uncle came, the prosecutrix narrated the incident to him, resultantly police was informed and a case was registered. During the course of ensuant investigations, the prosecutrix was medically examined, police lifted scientific samples from the spot, spot map was prepared, photographs were clicked and statement of the prosecutrix was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Police also procured apt date of birth records qua the prosecutrix, the accused persons were arrested and medically examined. Statements of the witnesses were recorded and after conclusion of the investigation police presented the challan in the learned Trial Court.

(3.) The learned Trial Court, vide impugned judgment convicted the accused persons and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs. 3,000/- each, and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for two months for the offence punishable under Section 452 Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as 'IPC'). For the offence punishable under Section 376D the convicts were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for twenty years and to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/- each, and in default of payment of fine they were sentenced to further undergo simple imprisonment for one year and for contravention of the provisions of 5(g) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as 'POCSO Act') sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs. 5000/- each, and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for six months under Section 6 of the POCSO Act. The substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently, hence the present appeal preferred by the accused/convicts.