KARAN RAI Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Shimla passed in Sessions Trial No.25-S/7 of 2005 whereby he has convicted the appellant of having committed offences punishable under Sections 315, 376(1) and 506 IPC. For the offence under Section 376(1) he has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment of 7 years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-. In default of payment of fine he has been directed to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for 2 years. The appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of five years for the offence punishable under Section 315 and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-. In default of payment of fine he has been ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. The appellant has also been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and to pay fine of Rs.5000/- for having committed offence punishable under Section 506 IPC, in default he has been directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. All the sentences have been directed to run concurrently. It has been further directed that the amount of fine of Rs.25,000/- if deposited shall be paid to the prosecutrix by way of compensation.

(2.) THE appellant aggrieved against his conviction and sentence has challenged the same by way of this appeal. It has been urged that there is no evidence whatsoever to convict the accused and he deserves to be acquitted.

(3.) THE prosecution case, in brief, is that the prosecutrix (name withheld) who was studying at the relevant time in class 12 in Chapslee Garden School filed a complaint Ext.PW-10/A with the Superintendent of Police, Shimla on November 2, 2004. In this complaint she alleged that the appellant resides at Annandale. He insisted that the prosecutrix should meet him and she developed acquaintance with him in the year 2002. The appellant started contacting her on telephone frequently and used to meet her on the way to school. In July, 2003 at about 4 p.m. he lured the prosecutrix towards the jungle near Glen in a white maruti van. He then pointed a pistol at the forehead of the prosecutrix and threatened her with dire consequences in case she did not yield to his sexual advances. Being scared and all alone and faced with a pistol, the prosecutrix gave in to the demands of the accused. Thereafter, the appellant allegedly threatened to kill the prosecutrix and also threatened to throw acid on her face and time and again made her to do illegal acts. Resultantly, she conceived a child and the accused got the child aborted and buried the foetus somewhere. According to the complaint the foetus was aborted by taking some pills and her parents were not aware of this fact. She did not tell these facts to her parents because the accused continued to threaten her. On the basis of this complaint, daily-diary report Ext.PW-10/B was recorded and formal FIR Ext.PW-11/A was registered.