SURAM DASS Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 30.8.2003, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kinnaur Sessions Division at Rampur, whereby the appellant-accused (hereafter referred to as the accused) has been convicted under Sections 342 and 511 read with Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for two months under Section 342, Indian Penal Code, and rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and fine of Rs. 20,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 511 read with Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Case of the prosecution in brief is that on 25.7.2002, when the prosecutrix (PW 1) was accompanied by Indra Devi (PW 2), the accused who was then working as a B. O. at Sungra called the prosecutrix inside his residential room and closed the door. On hearing the cries of the prosecutrix, PW 2 Indra informed Shitla Devi (PW 3) about the occurrence who rushed to the spot. On reaching the sport it was found that the accused has undressed himself and the prosecutrix and tried to commit rape on her. On enquiry prosecutrix disclosed to PW 3 that she was called inside the room by the accused on the pretext that he will give her sweets and when she was weeping he was pressing her neck. The matter was reported by PW 3 at Police Station Bhavanagar vide a written report Ex. PW 10/A came into being and investigation followed. PW 3 also presented a document (Ex. PW 3/A containing admission of the accused to the police. The prosecutrix was got medically examined and Dr. Naveen Gupta who examined the prosecutrix issued the MLC Ex. PW 8/A mentioning therein that there was no sign of injuries on the person of the prosecutrix and her hymen was intact. The clothes of the prosecutrix and her vaginal smear were taken by PW 8 in to possession for being sent for chemical examination and the M. L. C. in this regard in Ex. PW 5/A. As per the opinion given by PW 5, who medically examined the accused, the accused was found sexually portent PW 5 who medically examined the accused, the accused was found sexually portent PW 5 took in possession the public hair and the underwear of the accused for being sent for chemical analysis. A bed-sheet on which the prosecutrix was laid by the accused for committing rape upon her was taken in possession by the investigating officer vide Memo. Ex. PW 7/A. The material taken in possession by PW 5 and PW 8 for the purpose of chemical analysis and the bed sheet taken in possession vide Memo. Ex. PW 7/A were sent for chemical analysis and the report of the Assistant Director, State forensic science Laboratory, is Ex. PW 11/A. On being satisfied about the involvement of the accused in the commission of the offences the officer incharge of the concerned police station submitted a charge sheet against the accused who came to be tried by the learned Sessions Judge on a charge under Sections 342, 376 and 511 read with Section 376, Indian Penal Code.

(3.) To prove the charge against the accused, prosecution examined as many as 11 witnesses. Statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded wherein he denied he prose- cution case and claimed that on 22.7.2002, he had gone to the Police Station to lodge the report but the police refused to record his report and he was beaten upon by the police officials and a false case was instituted against him in connivance with one Krishan Bahadur who used to allow the vehicles to pass through check-post without any checking despite having been asked by the accused not to do so. The accused led defence and examined Tula Ram (DW 1) Lobha Ram (DW 2) and Sher Singh (DW 3).