CHIRANJI LAL Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appellant/convict/accused (hereafter referred to as the accused) has preferred the present appeal against the judgment dated 13/26.7.2001 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge. Mandi. Where by he has been convicted under Section 376 IPC and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.3000/ - and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for six months.

(2.) The case of the prosecution against the accused is that on 19.7.2000. there was a local fair in village Damahal to which the prosecutrix (PW -1) belongs. On the night intervening 19/20.7.2000. the prosecutrix and her cousin Promila (PW -11) were sleeping in the kitchen room of the house of the prosecutrix and at about 4 A.M.. mother of the prosecutrix (PW -2) had gone to see the fair. After departure of PW -1 from the house, the accused entered the kitchen room where the prosecutrix and PW -11 were sleeping and forcibly subjected the prosecutrix to sexual intercourse. On seeingthe advances of the accused. PW -11 left the kitchen room out of fear and went to the place of fair where she informed PW -2 that the accused was misbehaving with the prosecutrix. On receipt of this information. PW -2 returned home. In the meanwhile, the accused had left the place. The prosecutrix narrated the occurrence to her mother. The matter was reported to the police and FIR E.\.PW -1/A was registered against the accused under Section 376 IPC at Police Station. Karsog on 20.7.2000. On the request of the police, the prosecutrix was medically examined by Dr. Ajay Pathak (PW -7) who issued the MLC Ex.PW -7/C regarding medical examination of the prosecutrix. As per his opinion, sexual intercourse had taken place with the prosecutrix who was not habitual of sexual intercourse. At the time of medical examination of the prosecutrix. PW -7 took in possession the wearing apparels of the prosecutrix and swab. After arrest of the accused, he was also got medically examined from PW -7 who. on such examination vide MLC Ex.PW -7/E. opined that the accused . may not be incapable of performing sexual intercourse. At the time of his medical examination. PW -7 took the underwear of the accused in possession. The articles so taken in possession by PW -7 were handed over to the police for analysis. Opinion of Dr. S.K. Malhotra. Radiologist (PW -I3) was also taken regarding the skeleton age of the prosecutrix and as per the opinion of PW -13. the prosecutrix. at the time of her examination, was 13 to 15 years of age. During the course ofinvestigation. one chaddar Ex.P -1 of the bed on which the prosecutrix was sleeping at the relevant time was taken in possession by the investigating officer vide memo Ex.PW -3/A. On production by Meena Kumari. Sweater Ex.P -3 and shoes Ex.P -4 which the accused had left at the place of occurrence while slipping away after commission of the offence, were also taken in possession vide memo Ex.PW -3/B. On production by the accused, his shirt Ex.P -5 and pant Ex.P -6 were also taken in possession vide memo Ex.PW -3/C. The investigating agency further obtained and took in possession the Birth Certificate of the prosecutrix Ex.PW -3/D. entries in the Births and Deaths Register Ex.P\V -3/E and copy of the Pariwar Register Ex.PW -3/F vide memo Ex.PW -3/G. School Leaving Certificate of the prosecutrix Ex.PW -4/A was also taken in possession. The wearing apparels of the prosecutrix and the accused, the bed sheet and vaginal swab were sent for analysis to the State forensic Science Laboratory and the report received from the said Laboratory is Ex.PX. On being satisfied of the commission of an offence by the accused under Section 376 IPC. the officer incharge. Police Station. Karsog submitted a charge sheet against the accused who was tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. Mandi on a charge under Section 376 IPC.

(3.) To prove the charge against the accused, the prosecution examined 13 witnesses. Accused was examined under Section 313 Cr. P.C. wherein he denied the prosecution case and claimed to be innocent. He has further claimed that PW -2 and her relatives have planted a false case against him through the prosecutrix. The accused, however, did not lead any evidence in defence.