KEHAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF H P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE instant appeal is directed against the judgment, rendered on 30.11.2011, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (I), Kangra at Dharamshala, H.P. in Sessions Case No. 43 of 2011, whereby, the accused/appellant has been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.30,000/ - under Section 376 IPC and in default of payment of fine, he has been sentenced to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that prosecutrix PW -1 was attending tailoring session at Dadasiba with her aunt, Smt. Meena Kumari (PW -7). It is alleged that on 24.11.2010 the prosecutrix had gone with her aunt for training but her aunt had returned home around 12.00 a.m. and the prosecutrix was returning home around 3.00 p.m. with her friends in a tractor trolley and alighted at Gurala, as they did not find a bus. At that time, the prosecutrix found that her bag was missing and thereafter she proceeded on foot towards Dadasiba. It is further alleged that around 3 -3.30 p.m. Tarsem Singh (PW -8) Pammi, Subhash and accused Kehar Singh were sitting by the road side, some two kilometers behind Dadasiba towards Gurala. It is alleged that on her way, the prosecutrix met the above persons and accused Kehar Singh and they asked her as to where she was going, on which the prosecutrix told that she was going in search of her bag. It is alleged that thereafter these persons told that they had come from that side and they did not find her bag. Thereafter, Pammu asked accused Kehar Singh to take the prosecutrix to village Gurala on his scooter. It is alleged that though the accused took the prosecutrix on his scooter, but at some distance he stopped the scooter in the jungle, where there were bushes. It is alleged that thereafter accused Kehar Singh caught hold of the prosecutrix from her arms and took her towards the jungle even though, she objected to the act of the accused. Thereafter the accused laid the prosecutrix on the ground and committed rape on her. It is further alleged that thereafter accused brought the prosecutrix on his scooter up to Gurala and pushed her down from the scooter and fled away on his scooter. It is alleged that on her way to her home, the prosecutrix met her aunt (PW -7) Meena Kumari and wife of Tarsem, while she was weeping and told them about the above incident. It is alleged that Tilak Raj (the father of the prosecutrix) reached his home around 6 -6.30 p.m and the prosecutrix also came weeping home and she told her father and mother about the entire incident. It is further alleged that Tilak Raj talked about the incident with Ward Panch Kashmir Singh and after arranging a vehicle Tilak Raj alongwith Kashmir Singh, the prosecutrix and her aunt went to Police Station, Dehra and lodged F.I.R Ext.PW - 1/A around 12 in the night. It is alleged that the prosecutrix was got medically examined at Civil Hospital, Dehra and Dr. Anita Mahajan opined that the possibility of sexual intercourse could not be ruled out, as per MLC Ex.PW -1/B. It is alleged that the police came to prosecutrix's house on the next day and she produced her clothes i.e. Salwar Ex.P1 and Kameej Ex.P2, which were taken into possession vide memo Ext.PW -1/C by the I.O. in the presence of witnesses. It is alleged that the accused took the police to the spot and the police took photographs of spot and prepared spot map. The police had also taken into possession the birth certificate of the prosecutrix. It is alleged that the clothes of the prosecutrix and accused were seized and sent to the FSL for examination and human semen was detected on shirt and salwar of the prosecutrix and underwear of accused Kehar Singh.

(3.) ON conclusion of investigation into the offences, allegedly committed by the appellant/accused, challan was filed under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.