RAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT -convict Ram Singh, hereinafter referred to as the accused, has assailed the judgment dated 28.3.2013/30.3.2013, passed by Sessions Judge, Mandi, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, in Sessions Trial No. 19 of 2012, titled as State of H.P. v. Ram Singh, whereby he stands convicted for having committed an offence punishable under the provisions of Sections 376 & 354 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced as under:

(2.) IT is the case of prosecution that accused was posted as Physical Education Teacher (PET) at Government Middle School, Dahanu, where prosecutrix (PW -2) was studying in Class -8. On 1.12.2010, accused applied for half day leave and also made the prosecutrix apply for half day leave and also after making the prosecutrix do so, took her in his car towards an isolated place. After taking her into the jungle, he sexually assaulted her. Thereafter, he threatened her not to disclose the incident to anyone, lest she be defamed. However, after reaching home, prosecutrix narrated the incident to her mother, who, in turn, informed her husband. Eventually, the matter was reported to the police, vide complaint (Ex. PW -2/B), on the basis of which FIR No. 377, dated 2.12.2010 (Ex. PW -9/A), for commission of offences, under the provisions of Section 376/354 of the Indian Penal Code, was registered at Police Station, Balh, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh. Inspector Bahadur Singh (PW -9), who conducted the investigation, got the prosecutrix medically examined from Dr. Richa (PW -1), who issued MLC (Ex. PW -1/B). As per the doctor, possibility of sexual assault could not be ruled out. To establish the age of the prosecutrix, Investigating Officer took on record Birth Certificates (Ex. PW -3/C & 6/A), disclosing her date of birth to be 26.8.1998. With the completion of investigation, which, prima facie, revealed complicity of the accused in the alleged crime, challan was presented in the Court for trial.

(3.) IN order to establish its case, prosecution examined as many as 9 witnesses and statement of the accused, under the provisions of Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, was also recorded, in which he took the following defence: