PRAKASH CHAND Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant was convicted and sentenced by the learned trial Court in Sessions trial No. 27/7 of 2006/03, decided on 4.6.2010, whereby he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/ - under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and also rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/ - under Section 452 of the Indian Penal Code, with default clauses. Both the substantive sentences are ordered to run concurrently. The period spent by the appellant, hereinafter referred "the accused", in custody during the investigation and trial was also ordered to be set off as per the provision of Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Hence, the challenge to it has been made in this appeal.

(2.) PROSECUTION story in short is that the prosecutrix was a married woman aged about 37 years. She had three school going daughters. PW2 her husband was working as a Beldar in Public Works Department. On 24.10.2002, at 9 A.M., he had gone to Salnukhangad to attend his duties and her daughters had gone to school. Prosecutrix was having some pain and intended to visit Barmana to purchase some medicines, as such around 12 noon, she was getting ready.

(3.) MS . Archana Dutt, learned counsel for the accused vehemently argued that the statements of the prosecutrix and other witnesses are contradictory and further that the recovery of the clothes of the prosecutrix are also doubtful, rendering the entire prosecution story as a suspect. Further Sihnu Ram was not examined to whom the prosecutrix is alleged to have disclosed the incident and the recovery of the clothes was an eye -wash.