SUBHASH CHAND Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 30.10.2007 rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge- II, Kangra at Dharamshala, H.P., in Sessions Case No. 22- G/VII/2002, whereby the appellant/accused (hereinafter referred to as the "accused" for the sake of convenience) has been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years with a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for six months under Section 376/511 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that an information was received from the doctor at PGI Chandigarh disclosing that the prosecutrix suffering 95% burn injuries was admitted at PGI Chandigarh and her dying declaration was sought to be recorded. ASI Tarlochan Singh moved an application before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandigarh, for recording the statement of the prosecutrix. The Chief Judicial Magistrate visited PGI Chandigarh. The prosecutrix disclosed before him that the accused, husband of her sisterin- law (Nandoe) attempted to rape her and thereafter, her mother-in-law Shanti Devi sprinkled kerosene oil over her and put her on fire. Her mother-in-law used to harass her on account of demand of dowry. She jumped into a small water tank to save her life. Her mother-in-law was only present in the house and her husband had gone to Delhi. Her brother brought her to Hospital since he was informed by her neighbourers telephonically. She was also accompanied by her mother-in-law, father-in-law and the accused to the Hospital. The prosecutrix further disclosed that the accused had bad eye on her. On 11.1.1999 she was sent to the house of the accused. The accused attempted to commit rape with her. When she raised alarm, she was threatened that she would not be allowed to remain in her in-laws house. She was also offered Rs.1000/- to sleep with the accused. However, she refused and thereafter ran away towards mother of the accused. She did not disclose the incident to mother of the accused because she was threatened by the accused. On the basis of statement of the prosecutrix, recorded by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandigarh, initially an FIR under Sections 307, 498-A, 376 and 511 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code was registered. During investigation, offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code was found to have committed on 11.1.999 and a separate final report was prepared against the accused. The prosecutrix died on 3.2.1999 at PGI Chandigarh and an offence, found to have been committed on 30.1.1999 punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, was incorporated against her motherin- law and a challan was prepared and filed separately in the Court. Investigation was completed and the challan was filed in the court against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 376/511 of the Indian Penal Code, after completing all codal formalities.

(3.) The prosecution examined as many as ten witnesses to prove its case. He denied the case of the prosecution and claimed innocence. The accused also produced one witness in his defence. The learned trial court convicted and sentenced the accused vide judgment dated 30.10.2007 as stated hereinabove. Hence, this appeal. .