STATE OF H.P. Vs. SUNIL KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant/State under Sec. 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the impugned judgment of acquittal dtd. 2/2/2015, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Una, District Una, H.P., in Sessions Trial No. 8 of 2014, whereby the accused (respondent herein) was acquitted under Ss. 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (for short "IPC").

(2.) Brief facts giving rise to the present appeal, as per the prosecution story, are that on 1/9/2013 the prosecutrix/victim (name withheld) got lodged a complaint at Police Station, Bangana, wherein she alleged that her husband was labourer and on 31/8/2013, he had gone to the village for his work. She further alleged that her children had also gone to the school and after collecting grass from the forest, she returned home at around 12 noon. When she came back home, she found Sunil Mohammad (accused) sitting on a cot in the verandah of her house. She went inside the room to bring water for him, but in the interregnum, the accused also entered the room and caught hold of her and laid her on the double bed. As per the prosecutrix, the accused had torn her clothes and committed rape upon her. The accused also threatened her with dire consequences in case she disclosed the incident to anyone. Thereafter, on motor cycle, bearing registration No. HP-72-0397, the accused left the place. The prosecutrix narrated the incident to her husband when he returned home, but she could not report the matter to the police on 31/8/2013 due to fear. Upon the complaint, so made by the prosecutrix, the police registered a case against the accused and the investigation commenced. The prosecutrix was got medically examined at R.H. Una and scientific samples were preserved. Police photographed the spot, prepared the site plan, effected relevant recoveries and the statements of the witnesses were recorded. The accused was also medically examined at CHC Bangana. The scientific samples were sent for chemical analysis to RFSL, Dharamshala. During the course of the investigation, the accused made a disclosure statement under Sec. 27 of the Indian Evidence Act and the place of occurrence was demarcated. The motorcycle of the accused was taken into possession and the statement of the prosecutrix under Sec. 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded. After completion of the investigation, police presented the chagesheet before the learned Trial Court.

(3.) The learned Trial Court, vide order dtd. 19/6/2014 framed charge against the accused under Sec. 376 and 506 of IPC, to which he did not plead guilty and claimed trial.