RAVI KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge (I), Kangra at Dharamsala in Sessions Case No.l7 -N/96 dated 22.12.1997. By means of impugned judgment, appellant has been found guilty having committed offences under Section 341 and 376IPC. He has been convicted and setenced to undergo five years rigorous imprisonment under Section 376 IPC and also to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/ -, in default of payment whereof he has been directed to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. At the same time, he has been directed to undergo simple imprisonment for fifteen days for having committed offence under Section 314 IPC. In the event of recovery of fine, a sum of Rs.800/ - shall be paid to the prosecutrix and the period during the course of investigation, inquiry or trial, shall be set off under Section 428 Cr. P. C. Substantive sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) As per prosecution case on 1.7.1995, Kumari Monika (PW -5) was on her way to school at about 7.30 AM, when on the said date and time, appellant committed rape of her. Thus, he was charged under Sections 341/376 1PC to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. With a view to bring home the guilty against the appellant, prosecution examined as many as 19 witnesses.

(3.) Prosecution case as revealed from its evidence was that on the fateful day the prosecutrix was on her way to school from village Indpur to Indora. for going to school, she had to cover part of distance on foot and thereafter she used to board the bus. From her home, when she was on her way to the motor road to catch the bus, she was caught hold of by the appellant and taken to bushes. She raised alaram and cries, but none came to her rescue. According to her, accused held out that he wanted to marry her. She was laid on the ground which was grassy and then was ravished by the appellant against her wish not once but thrice despite her having resisted and having caused scratches wherever she could with her hands and nails on the body of the appellant. Instead of going to school, she returned to her residence at 1.30 PM. Before leaving she held out that she would narrate the incident to her family members whe the appellant held out that it will bring a bad name to her.