LAWS(HPH)-1993-10-7

KUNJI RAM Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

Decided On October 06, 1993
KUNJI RAM Appellant
V/S
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the appellants were charged under sections 366 -A/376/120 -B of the Indian Penal Code. The appellants happened to be husband and wife. The trial Court convicted both the appellants under the aforesaid sections and Kunji Ram was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three years for offence under section 120 -B read with sections 376 and 366 -A, I P. C. He was further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years for offence under Sec 376, I. P.C. and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000 each. It was further ordered that the entire amount of fine, that is, Rs. 4,000 would be paid to the prosecutrix as compensation In so far as the other appellant Smt. Guddi Devi was concerned, instead of being sent to imprisonment, she was ordered to be released on probation for good conduct for a period of two years on her executing personal and surety bonds in the sum of Rs. 7,000 each undertaking to keep peace and to be of good behaviour during this period and to appear and receive sentence when called upon by the court to do so.

(2.) The prosecution case as put up against the appellant has been that during the intervening night of 5th/6th September, 1986 there was a fair being celebrated in village Karlash and the prosecutrix Urmila Devi, along with other girls, was enjoying the fair by dancing At mid -night accused Guddi Devi, who was present in the Mela, went to Urmila Devi Prosecutrix and took her out of the dancing circle and asked her to accompany Guddi Devi as she was to go for answering the call of nature. The prosecutrix acceded to the request of Guddi Devi and accompanied her. Both of them reached near the house of one Maldar Accused Kunji Ram who was hiding himself in the darkness near the eucalyptus tree at once appeared at that place and accused Guddi Devi caught Urmila from behind and made the prosecutrix to lie down on the ground. Guddi Devi thereafter gagged tie mouth of the prosecutrix, Urmila Devi, and Guddi Devi placed her feet on the arms of the prosecutrix. Kunji Ram thereafter broke the string of Urmilas Salwar and started committing sexual -intercourse with her. The prosecutrix cried out of pain but her cries could not be heard as Guddi Devi had gagged her mouth, The accused thus committed sexual intercourse with the pros? cutrix against her will and without her consent Accused Kunji Ram was still committing the sexual act when in the mean time Smt Rampati and Smt. Surfoo, who happened to come out of their house to urinate, at first instance heard some noise coming from the place of occurrence and when they went nearby the two accused ran away leaving behind the prosecutrix at the place of occurrence The prosecutrix was then removed from there and lateron Smt. Shanti and Smt. Megh Dass etc. had gone to the parents house of the prosecutrix and informed them about the occurrence. The parents of the prosecutrix reached early in the morning and removed the prosecutrix to the Police Station where the matter was reported to the police. The prosecutrix was medically examined in Ripon Hospital at Shimla because no lady doctor was available at Rohru Hospital. However, she was also taken to Jubbal Hospital where also no lady doctor was available. The accused was arrested and was also medically examined The wearing apparels of the prosecutrix as well as that of the accused were taken into possession which were having blood stains. The age of the prosecutrix, as per medical examination, was opined to be below 16 years. The wearing apparels taken into possession were sent to the Chemical Examiner and thereafter to the Serologist. Blood was found by the Chemical Examiner on those garments and as per the report of the Serologist the blood so found was to be of human blood.

(3.) The accused when examined under section 313, Cr. P. C. denied all the circumstances appearing in the prosecution evidence against them. Both of them could not disclose as to why this case had been put up against them. However, during the trial some witnesses were cross -examined on the point that there was some enmity between the parties.