DEVINDER KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant/accused/convict (hereinafter referred to as the accused) under Sec. 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.PC) against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 30/6/2023, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P., in Sessions Trial No.28/2022/2012, whereby he was convicted under Ss. 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.20,000.00and in case of default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 months for commission of the offence punishable under Sec. 366 of IPC and for commission of the offence punishable under Sec. 376 of IPC, he was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.25,000.00 and in case of default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case, giving rise to the instant appeal as per the prosecution story, are that the prosecutrix (name withheld) was was well acquainted with the accused and he had promised to marry her. On 10/3/2012, at about 10:00 pm, the accused made a telepathic call to her and informed that he was waiting for her on the road. He told her to leave the home and accompany him as he wanted to marry her. Thereafter, he took her to Kyoli nullah in a Nano car, which was being driven by one Pendru, who was told by the accused to pick them up in the morning and in the morning, said Pendru came and dropped them at Bhulah, from where, the accused took her to the house of his relatives at Shankar Dehra. Thereafter, he took her to his home on 12/3/2012, where she came to know that the accused was already, having two children and then she asked him to drop her at her home, however, he told her that he would get her married to his younger brother. The accused committed rape upon her w.e.f. 10/3/2012 to 12/3/2012 on the pretext of marriage. Thereafter, the prosecutrix any how reached her home on 13/3/2012 and narrated the entire incident to her parents and then on 19/3/2012, she alongwith her parents and relatives went to the police and lodged FIR against the accused. During the course of investigation, police prepared the site plan of the place from where, the prosecutrix was taken. Police took into possession the mobile phone as well as SIM card of the prosecutrix. The police got conducted the medical examination of the prosecutrix and the doctor did not find any marks of injury on her body. The accused was also medically examined by the police. The police also recorded the statements of the witnesses and had taken into possession certain documents.

(3.) On the completion of the investigation and receipt of the SFSL report, the charge-sheet was prepared and presented before the trial Court.