VINOD ALIAS DINESH Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is instituted against the judgment and order dated 15.12.2015 and 19.12.2015, respectively, rendered by the learned Special Judge, Shimla, H.P. in Sessions Trial No. 6 -S/7 of 2014, whereby the appellant -accused (hereinafter referred to as the accused), was charged with and tried for offences punishable under Sections 376 (F) and 506 of IPC and Section 6 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as POCSO Act). The accused was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of fourteen years and to pay fine of Rs. 50,000/ - under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and in default of payment of fine he was ordered to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year. The accused was also sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence punishable under Section 506 IPC. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The prosecutrix was also held entitled for a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/ - as compensation in addition to the amount of Rs. 50,000/ - as awarded separately. The amount was ordered to be given to the prosecutrix out of the State Government's Victim Compensation Fund for the purpose of rehabilitation. The copy of the judgment was sent to the Member Secretary, H.P. State Legal Services Authority, Shimla.

(2.) The case of the prosecution, in a nut shell, is that the prosecutrix (PW -1), appeared before the Police Station, Rohroo along with her father on 1.12.2013. She moved an application stating therein that she has been raped by the accused. She is a Nepali national and residing with her parents in the rented house at Rohroo. The accused happened to be her maternal Uncle. He also used to reside in a room in the building in which the prosecutrix along with her parents used to reside. The accused was running a Dhaba. On 27.7.2013, the prosecutrix was called by the accused in his room on the pretext of some work. She was raped. When she tried to scream, the accused gagged her mouth. The accused threatened her that she and her parents would be finished in case she disclosed this fact to anyone. Thereafter, the victim stopped working in the hotel of the accused. She also became pregnant. Thereafter F.I.R. No. 94/2013 was registered. The prosecutrix was sent to DDU Hospital, Shimla for medico legal examination. The doctor opined that the age of the prosecutrix was between 12 to 14 years. The spot was visited by the I.O. The doctor also found the evidence that the prosecutrix was subjected to coitus. She was also found to be pregnant carrying pregnancy of 21 weeks and 4 days. According to the date of birth certificate, the prosecutrix was born on 15.05.2000 and at the time of incidence she was about 13 years 2 months and 12 days. The police also filed the supplementary challan on 10.08.2014 by stating therein that during the investigation, the blood samples of accused were taken and when on 07.03.2014 the victim gave birth to a male child then the blood sample of the victim and her newly born child were also taken for DNA profiling. In the DNA profiling, the child victim was found to be the biological mother of the male child whereas the male child was found to be the biological son of the accused. The matter was investigated and on completion of the investigation, challan was put up after completing all the codal formalities.

(3.) The prosecution, in order to prove its case, has examined as many as 18 witnesses. The accused was also examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. He has denied the prosecution case. The accused has examined as many as 12 witnesses in defence. The learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused, as noticed hereinabove.