STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. DUMNU RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE instant appeal is directed by the State of H.P. against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P. rendered in Sessions trial No. 42 of 2008, whereby, the learned trial Court acquitted the accused for his having allegedly committed the offences punishable under Sections 376 and 506 the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) FIR Ex. PW7/A, lodged qua the occurrence with police station, Sundernagar, records in brief the facts relating to the alleged incident. The facts apposite to decide the appeal, are that on 15.5.2008 at about 6.30 -7 p.m., the prosecutrix came to Kali temple at Bobbar to attend a "Jagrata". On the intervening night at about 1.30 a.m. Smt. Chhamma Devi wife of the Pujari of the temple sent the prosecutrix to fetch the blankets from her house. On her way back to the temple with blankets, accused Dumnu Ram alias Ramesh came across her and commented that it was time to take trip. The accused made the prosecutrix forcibly sit on the motor cycle. The accused took the prosecutrix in a Nala situate above the road and tried to commit wrongful act with the prosecutrix. The shrieks, hues and cries of the prosecutrix did not attract any person towards the Nala and the accused made the prosecutrix lie on the ground and opened the string of her salwar and committed sexual intercourse with her. The accused committed the act of sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix twice or thrice and threatened to do away with the life of the prosecutrix if she narrated the incident to any person. The prosecutrix became unconscious. The accused, in the meantime, got a telephonic call and the mobile fell from the hands of the accused, on which the prosecutrix fed from the place to the temple where she disclosed the occurrence to Ms. Daya and Rozy. Smt. Kunta Devi wife of Sh. Sanju told the prosecutrix not to disclose the incident to any person. On account of the threats of the accused, the prosecutrix did not disclose the incident to any person. The prosecutrix, on the night of 16.05.2008 after jagrata stayed at the house of her maternal uncle. Smt. Kunta again met the prosecutrix in the evening of 17.05.2008 and caught the prosecutrix from her arm and tried to prevail upon her to stay at her house on the pretext that the accused was also coming to her house on that day. On finding the prosecutrix with Smt. Kunta Devi, her maternal uncles S/Sh. Guddu and Milkhi Ram, on inquiry were narrated the incident. The prosecutrix had washed her wearing apparels at the house of Ms. Rozy, who had also provided her apparels to the prosecutrix for change. On 18.05.2008, the prosecutrix was brought by her maternal uncles to her home where she narrated the incident to her mother. On finding the commission of offence under Section 376 and 506 IPC, the police commenced the investigation. The prosecutrix was medically examined by Dr. Sarla, who opined that the prosecutrix had been exposed to sexual assault per MLC Ex. PW2/C and samples were preserved. The accused was arrested and was medically examined by Dr. Sanjay Pathak, who opined that the accused was capable of performing sexual act. During the course of the investigation, the police also took into possession birth certificate of the prosecutrix from the concerned panchayat. The motor cycle of the accused along with its documents and its key was also taken into possession in presence of the witnesses vide separate recovery memo. The case property was handed over to the MHC and samples were sent for analysis to the FSL.

(3.) THE accused was charged for his having committed offences under Sections 376 and 506 of the IPC by the learned trial Court. In proof of the prosecution case, the prosecution examined 15 witnesses. On conclusion of recording of the prosecution evidence, the statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded by the Court, in which the accused claimed false implication.