CHUHRA RAM Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant has felt aggrieved and dis-satisfied by the impugned judgment of conviction in Sessions Trial No. 7-NL/7 of 1998 dated 29.4.2000 whereby he has been convicted under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to under-go simple imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of rupees 10,000/-, in default of payment of fine, the appellant was further ordered to under-go simple imprisonment for a period of one year, which has been assailed in this appeal.

(2.) THE grounds laid in appeal by the appellant are that the trial Court did not appreciate the fact of litigation inter-se the parties which fact stood admitted even in the statement of the prosecutrix. further the testimony of the prosecutrix did not inspire confidence, the entire Whether reporters of the Local papers are allowed to see the judgment? . Yes. evidence of the prosecution was full of contradictions and the delay in F.I.R. was not properly explained, the medical evidence did not conclude the factum of rape and also that the discrepancies which went to the route of the case were brushed aside without any cogent reasons, thus prayed for acceptance of the appeal. I have heard Shri R.K. Gautam, Senior Advocate instructed by Shri Naveen Bhardwaj, Advocate for the appellant and Shri V.K. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General for the State.

(3.) I have given my thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions of the parties and have reappraised the evidence on record. CASE OF THE PROSECUTION The factual matrix of the case is that the prosecutrix is the wife of Ranjit Singh (PW4). It is alleged that on 26th September, 1987, at about 4.000 p.m, she had gone to her fields to cut the grass. When she was returning back at about 5.30 P.M, with a head load of grass, the appellant is alleged to have caught hold her from her back with the result, she fell down with her head-load. Thereafter, the appellant caught hold her from the breast. She raised hue and cry, he gagged her mouth and slapped her. Thereafter, she was pushed on the ground, string of her salwar was broken and the appellant took off and threw the salwar away and thereafter forcefully committed the rape and ran away towards village Nand. Thereafter, she put on her salwar, picked up the head load of the grass and reached her house around 6.00 P.M. The husband of the prosecutrix was not in the house. He returned around 7.00 P.M. and she informed him about the alleged incident. Immediately, thereafter he went to the house of the appellant and informed about the episode to his father Santa Ram in the presence of the appellant. The appellant proclaimed that he had enjoyed the prosecutrix and he may do whatever he liked . Ranjit Singh her husband returned back to his house and after some time went to the Pradhan Ram Asra (PW7) and informed him about the incident. The said Pradhan told him that he would call for the appellant in the morning and enquire about the allegations. Next day, i.e, on 27.9.1997, Pradhan Ram Asra along with Datta Ram Lamberdar visited the house of Ranjit Singh and the appellant was also called there. The matter was enquired from him. Again he proclaimed that he had enjoyed the prosecutrix and whatever they wanted to do, they are at liberty to do. On this, the Pradhan told the husband of the prosecutrix to report the matter to the Police. The prosecutrix lodged the report Exhibit PW1/A on the same day around 4.15 P.M. in Police Station, Ramshehar.