RATTAN LAL Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since both these appeals arise out of the same judgment of conviction dated 6.5.2002 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, therefore, are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) Case of the prosecution is that the prosecutrix (PW-3) a student of 8th standard and aged about 15 years in July, 1999 during vacations in the School was present in her house in village Mandi Manwan. Her younger brother Devinder and younger sister Karamjit were also present in the house. Their parents were away from the house. The prosecutrix was washing the utensils in the kitchen. The Appellants/accused (hereafter referred to as 'the accused') entered the house, gave toffees to younger brother and sister of the prosecutrix and asked them to go out of the room and both the children went out of the room. Thereafter accused Rattan Lal forcibly carried the prosecutrix from the Kitchen and put her on a cot while accused Tara Chand stood guard at the door. Accused Rattan Lal tied the hands of the prosecutrix with a rope and thereafter committed rape on her. Thereafter accused Rattan Lal stood at the door of the room and accused Tara Chand committed rape on the prosecutrix. The prosecutrix tried to raise hue and cry but her mouth was gagged with a Chuni. After commission of the rape, both the accused threatened the prosecutrix that in the event of her disclosing the occurrence, they would burn her and her family members. Parents of the prosecutrix returned, home at about 6 p.m. when the prosecutrix informed them about the rape having been committed on her by the accused. Thereafter, her step-father Rup Ram (PW-5) called Dhani Ram father of accused Rattan Lal, whose house is close to the house of the prosecutrix, to his house and complained about the act of accused Rattan Lal. Dhani Ram, however, did not admit the allegations and told PW-5 to call accused Tara Chand to find out the truth Accused Tara Chand, however, was not available and had left with the truck. Therefore, PW-5 at the instance of Dhani Ram decided not to report the matter to the police. Accused Tara Chand returned to the village with the truck on 4.6.2000. PW-5 then enquired from him in the presence of other villagers about the incident of rape. Accused Tara Chand admitted the commission of rape on being prompted by accused Rattan Lal and tendered apology which was reduced into writing Ext. PG. Amongst others the prosecutrix, her mother Muninder Kaur (PW-4), Surjit Singh (?W-6), Daulat Ram, Nand Lal, Mali Ram, Ravi Chandel, Khursheed Mohammad and Razak Mohammad were also present. On inquiries made by PW-4 from accused Rattan Lal about the occurrence, his father Dhani Ram intervened and assaulted PW-4 and asked his son accused Rattan Lal to run away. On 11th and 12th October, 2000 the accused alongwith four or five other persons at about 9.30 a.m. and 4.30 p.m. came in a vehicle to village Mandi Manwan/Raghunathpura when the prosecutrix used to go to and come back from School and they forcibly tried to take her away in the vehicle with intention to commit rape and thus they rendered it difficult for the prosecutrix to go to the School. The matter was then reported to the police by PW-5 but no action was taken in the matter. A complaint was then filed by the prosecutrix through her mother (PW-4) in the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur who directed registration of a case on the basis of the said complaint and as a consequence FIR Ext. PK under Sections 376, 354, 506 and 34 IPC was recorded at police station, Bilaspur and the investigation followed. During investigation, copy of the document containing admission of the commission of the offence by the accused Ext. PE was taken in possession by the Investigating Officer (PW-13) vide Memo Ext. PG. Birth certificates of the prosecutrix Ext. PH and Ext. PJ respectively from the School and the Panchayat were also taken in possession. Dr. Anita Sharma (PW-1) who medically examined the prosecutrix and also procured the opinion of the Gynecologist and Radiologist issued the M.L.C. Ext. PA and opined that the possibility of rape having been committed on the prosecutrix could not be ruled out and her skeleton age was less than 16 years but more than 14 years. At the time of medical examination of the prosecutrix, PW-1 took vaginal and urethra smear slides which were sealed and sent to State Forensic Science Laboratory for analysis and the report received therefrom is Ext. PB according to which nothing incriminating was found in the vaginal and urethral smear. Specimen signatures of accused Tara Chand Exts. PO, PO/1 to PO/5 were obtained in the presence of a Judicial Magistrate (PW-14) and as per the opinion Ext. PP given by Vishveshwar Sharma, Scientific Officer (PW-11) the specimen signatures tallied with the signatures of accused Tara Chand on Ext. PG. The accused on their arrest were also got medically examined and as per the MLCs Ext. PL and Ext. PM respectively about the medical examination of accused Tara Chand and Rattan Lal issued by Dr. C.R. Verma (PW-10) both the accused were found fit to perform sexual intercourse.

(3.) On being satisfied of the commission of the offence under Sections 376/34 and 506/34 IPC by the accused the Officer-Incharge accordingly submitted a charge-sheet and the learned Sessions Judge Bilaspur accordingly framed charges against the accused to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.