DEVO Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appellant Devo was convicted under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code for committing the offence of rape and has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000.00 and in default of payment of fine the convict has further been ordered to undergo imprisonment for six months vide judgment dated 9/07/1993 by the Addl. Sessions Judge (I) Kangra Division at Dharamsala.

(2.) The present appellant is the resident of village Bohd situated at a distance of about 3 KM from Nurpur town of District Kangra. The prosecutrix, Kumari Anita, was also the resident of the same village. It has been the prosecution case that this prosecutrix suffered from polio and as a consequence thereof she was handicapped and on that accound did not have her schooling. Her father is one Shri Bishambar who in the year 1990 was running a tea stall at Amritsar for earning his livelihood. The prosecutrix at the relevant time was residing with her mother, Smt. Asha Devi, (PW 3) in village Bodh. The prosecutrix has one sister named Kumari Mamta who was suffering from paralysis. Both the sisters, being handicapped, were looked after by the mother. The occurrence took place on 16/02/1990 and, admittedly, the age of the prosecutrix at that time was 19 years.

(3.) According to the prosecution, on 16/02/1990, Smt. Asha Devi, the mother of the Prosecutrix, had gone to village Baral for fetching fodder and for this purpose she left the house at about 2.30 in the afternoon and in her absence both the sisters were all alone in the house. This appellant Devo at that time was running a vegetable shop in the village which shop was situated near the house of the prosecutrix. The appellant when came to know that the two sisters were all alone in the house, he went to their house and entered the courtyard. The prosecutrix came in the courtyard to talk to the accused but at that very time the accused took the prosecutrix, taking undue advantage of her physical disability, to the cattle shed situated besides the courtyard and there he was alleged to have committed sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix against her will, and without her consent and after satisfying his lust the appellant ran away from the spot leaving behind the helpless prosecutrix in a most deplorable state. According to the prosecution, the prosecutrix after the commission of the crime came out of the cattle shed and sat on Charpoy which was lying in the courtyard and waited for the arrival of her mother.