STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. NITIN CHAUHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal filed by State of Himachal Pradesh under Section 378 of the Cr.P.C. against the judgment of the court of learned Sessions Judge, Sirmaur District at Nahan, H.P., dated 8.10.2002, vide which the respondents were acquitted of the charge framed against them under Sections 363, 366, 376, 506 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 3 of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts of the case are that on 24.1.2000, at 1.15 p.m., a statement under Section 154 Cr.P.C. was made by prosecutrix ˜A' (name not mentioned) that she is studying in Girls School at Nahan and is living at Nahan alongwith her father and younger brother since June. It was alleged that while going to the school and for tuition, respondent Parveen who is living in Medical Colony, Nahan and who was known to her, used to ask her to talk to him. He had asked her on 22.11.2000 to meet her, failing which, he would not talk to her. She stated that on 23.1.2000, she alongwith her friends Indira and Sharmila had gone to purchase notebooks at 10.30 a.m. at Mall Road, Nahan, where her friends left her. She was coming back towards her quarter and at about 11.00 a.m., one jeep (number mentioned) stopped near her and Parveen came out of the said vehicle and asked her as to why she was not talking to him. She ignored him and the other person, who was driving the vehicle, also made a comment, but she did not reply. Thereafter, the driver of the vehicle got down, pushed her inside the vehicle and took the vehicle on Shimla road. She tried to get down from the running vehicle and the said driver, whose name she learnt as Tinku, son of Shri Sadanand, caught her from the arms and did not allow her to get down. The respondent Parveen was sitting on the side of the driver and they took the vehicle for a distance of 3 km. Thereafter, the driver got down and gave the vehicle to Parveen and Parveen took the vehicle for a distance of 2/3 furlongs on kachcha road and he asked her as to why she was not talking to him and she told him that her brother had asked not to talk. There Tinku informed Parveen that his father has learnt about his coming here and that the tyre of his vehicle has got punctured and asked Parveen to leave the place, but Parveen refused to leave. Parveen asked her to get out of the vehicle, but she was made again to sit in the vehicle by Tinku, who came inside and sat by her side and there was exchange of abuses in between her and Tinku. She wanted to hit him with an iron rod lying in the vehicle, but he threw it and gave a slap blow and dragged her from hair and threw her towards the window side. She tried to rescue herself and he caught hold of her from both arms, removed her salwar, underwear and attempted to rape her. It was further alleged that she gave a tooth bite on his hand, who gave her a slap blow, removed his pants and committed rape with her. She raised an alarm and also gave beatings to him with legs and fists and thereafter Parveen came there, called Tinku and Tinku proceeded on foot while Parveen brought her back in the vehicle to some distance where she was asked to wash her face with the water brought by a hotelier. Parveen bought 5/6 packets of Raj Darbar Gutkha. Thereafter, Parveen brought the vehicle to Nahan and gave a threat to her that Tinku was a well connected person and she will not be able to cause any harm to him and, therefore, she should not tell about the occurrence to any person. She was made to get down near a mechanic shop on Shimla road and there she asked the way to her house and reached there. She took 15 -20 tablets lying in her house and she started vomiting. Thereafter, at 2.00 p.m., she went to the quarter of one Parmeshwar Negi, where Parmeshwar, Ravi and Sandeep met her and she told them about the occurrence. She went to her quarter and slept there. Then she took Brasso meant for cleaning of utensils. In the morning, at 6.30 a.m., she went for tuition, but she was not feeling well and one Indira came there and the prosecutrix told her about the occurrence. The said Indira accompanied by her brother Tejasvi brought her to zonal hospital and admitted her there. Thereafter, information was sent to the police, who came there and her statement was recorded and a case was registered.

(3.) WE have heard Mr. Vivek Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General for the appellant, Mr. M. S. Chandel, learned Senior Advocate for the respondent No. 1 and Mr. Ramakant Sharma, learned counsel for respondent No. 2, and have gone through the record of the case.