STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. BHAJAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FOR an offence, which is alleged to have been committed on 4th August, 2004, accused was put to trial. In terms of judgment dated 28th March, 2005, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Solan, in Sessions Trial No. 18 -S/7 of 2004, titled as State of Himachal Pradesh versus Bhajan Lal, accused stands acquitted of the charged offences. It is the case of the prosecution that on 4th August, 2004, prosecutrix (PW -1) had gone to the forest, near village Ralli Manjali, to collect fuel wood. She was also carrying a "Drat" with herself at that time. At about 4 p.m., accused, who also hails from the same village, arrived on the spot, took the "Drat" from the hand of the prosecutrix, threw it in the bushes and thereafter, after dragging the prosecutrix for some time, pushed her on the ground, as a result of which she sustained injuries on her body. Prosecutrix was then subjected to rape by the accused. She cried for help. Hearing her cries, Shri Durga Dass (PW -3) arrived at the spot. Accused then ran away from the spot. Shri Durga Dass took the prosecutrix to her house. In the evening, at about 6, husband of the prosecutrix Shri Tara Chand (PW -2) came when she narrated the incident to him. Shri Tara Chand took the prosecutrix to Police Post Kuthar, where report dated 5th August, 2004 (Ex. PA) was lodged, copy of which was sent to Police Station, Kasauli, where FIR No. 82, dated 5th August, 2004 (Ex. PJ) was registered. Prosecutrix was got medically examined through Dr. Renu Vats (PW -4), who issued MLC (Ex. PB). Salwar worn by the prosecutrix was taken into possession by the police and sent for chemical analysis, alongwith the other material and report (Ex. PK) was obtained. Police, after visiting the spot also prepared site plan (Ex. PN) and recorded statements of the relevant witnesses.

(2.) WITH the completion of investigation, challan was presented in the Court for trial. Accused was charged for having committed offences punishable under Sections 376 and 506 (second part) of the Indian Penal Code, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

(3.) WE have heard Mr. R.K. Sharma, Senior Advocate/Senior Additional Advocate General, assisted by Mr. J.S. Guleria, Assistant Advocate General on behalf of the State as also Shri Himmat Negi, Advocate, on behalf of the accused. We have also minutely examined the testimonies of the witnesses and other documentary evidence placed on record by the prosecution. Having minutely examined the record, we are of the considered view that no case for interference is made out at all. We find that the judgment rendered by the trial Court is well reasoned and is based on complete and proper appreciation of evidence (documentary and ocular) placed on record. There is neither any illegality/infirmity nor any perversity in the same.