LAWS(HPH)-2017-9-95

VIVEK SINGH Vs. STATE OF H P

Decided On September 22, 2017
VIVEK SINGH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF H P Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal, judgment dated 12.04.2016, passed by learned Special Judge, Chamba (H.P.), in Sessions Trial No.21 of 2015, whereby the appellant (hereinafter referred to as the accused) has been convicted for commission of offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (hereinafter referred to as POCSO Act in short) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and also to pay Rs.5,000/- as fine, has been challenged on the grounds, inter-alia, that the evidence available on record has not been appreciated in its right perspective. The highly interesting evidence produced by the prosecution has been given undue weightage and the evidence produced by the accused has been erroneously brushed aside and to the contrary the impugned judgment has been based upon surmises and conjectures.

(2.) The inconsistencies and contradictions in the prosecution evidence which have rendered the prosecution story highly doubtful were erroneously ignored and the findings of conviction recorded against the accused were passed on the story which was engineered and concocted. The accused had not committed the alleged offence. On the other hand, the child already suffering from infection, was under treatment in NHPC Hospital at Karian, District Chamba. The complainant, none-else but the wife of accused as well as her mother were not in cordial relations with him and other members of his family as she (complainant) even had implicated his brother with the allegations that he raped her. The testimony of DW-3 Rajesh Kumar that the complainant PW-1 Anju was previously married to his brother and when he went to bring her to matrimonial home, she got him beaten up from 5-6 hired Gundas and after that he expired within 10-15 days, has not at all been taken into consideration. Therefore, the involvement of the accused in the alleged offence is not at all established and the impugned judgment has been sought to be quashed.

(3.) If coming to the factual matrix, the prosecution case discloses a sorrow state of affairs because PW-1 Anju, the complainant, none-else but the wife of accused has levelled allegations against him in the application Ext.PW-1/B to the Deputy Commissioner, Chamba, that her husband, the accused, has committed sexual intercourse with her daughter less than two years of age. The complainant PW-1 Anju, has levelled the allegations in Ext.PW-1/B that her husband, the accused, has subjected her minor daughter below two years of age to sexual intercourse while under the influence of liquor about 1 ½ months ago. This fact came to her notice when the victim child was got medically examined in the hospital from a lady doctor. The doctor disclosed that her daughter was subjected to sexual intercourse. The Additional District Magistrate, Chamba, District Chamba, H.P., had forwarded the application Ext.PW-1/B to S.H.O. Police Station Sadar, Chamba, for necessary action. Consequently, FIR Ext.PW-1/A came to be registered on 10.02.2015 under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 4 of POCSO Act.