SUDESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT -convict Sudesh Kumar, hereinafter referred to as the accused, has assailed the judgment dated 31.12.2011, passed by Additional Sessions Judge -I, Kangra at Dharamshala, Himachal Pradesh, in Sessions Trial No. 62 -D/2010, titled as State of Himachal Pradesh v. Sudesh Kumar, whereby he stands convicted of the offences, punishable under the provisions of Sections 341, 506 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced as under:

(2.) IT is the case of prosecution that prosecutrix (PW 14), resident of Jhikar, was running a tailoring and beauty parlour in village Gharoh. On 21.8.2010, after closing her parlour, while she was returning home, at about 6.15 p.m., accused met her at Murad Gohar and disclosed his liking for her. Also, he prevented her from going home and on the spot forcibly subjected her to sexual intercourse. Finding the prosecutrix not to have returned home, since it was raining heavily, her mother Reeta Devi (PW 2) and father Prem Chand came to search for her. On way, they met the prosecutrix, who disclosed the entire incident to them. The matter was immediately brought to the notice of Pradhan Urmila (PW 1), who called the accused and his parents. Though accused did not come, but his father and brother came and expressed their regrets. The matter was immediately brought to the notice of the police. On the basis of complaint (Ex. PW 14/A), police registered FIR No. 208, dated 22.8.2010 (Ex. PW 15/A), under the provisions of Section 376/341/506 of the Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Dharamshala. Prosecutrix was got medically examined at the Government Hospital, Dharamshala. Dr. Shalini Gautam (PW 7), who conducted the medical examination, issued MLC (Ex. PW 7/B). Investigating Officer, Narain Singh (PW -15), conducted investigation on the spot. He took into possession clothes of the prosecutrix as also other incriminating articles. Report of the Forensic Science Laboratory, with respect to the vaginal swab and the clothes was obtained by the police. 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.) ACCUSED was charged for having committed offences, punishable under the provisions of Sections 341, 506 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, to which he did not plead guilty and claimed trial.