STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. PANKAJ SAMKADIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this appeal, the State has challenged the judgment passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Kangra at Dharamshala in Sessions Case (RBT) No. 268/2012, dated 17.09.2014, vide which learned trial Court has acquitted the accused for commission of offences punishable under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The case of the prosecution was that prosecutrix moved an application on 16.11.2012 to Superintendent of Police, Kangra mentioning therein that three years ago while she was a student of +1 class in a school at Rehan, accused used to come and obstruct her path and insisted for her friendship and also threatened that in case she refused his friendship, then he would falsely level allegations against her. At that relevant time, age of the prosecutrix was 16 years and she was allured by the accused, who took her to a hotel at Nurpur and committed sexual intercourse with her forcibly and also allured her to marry him, besides threatening her that in case she revealed these facts to anyone, he would kill her family members. Accused continued to have sexual intercourse with prosecutrix for about three years and also intimidated her that he would defame the prosecutrix by showing her MMS. It was also the case of the prosecutrix that she lodged the FIR when after attaining the age of 18 years, she asked the accused to marry her, who however declined to marry her. Prosecutrix also stated that she had reported the matter to SHO, Police Station, Nurpur on 05.09.2011, wherein she was called upon to enter into a compromise forcibly.

(3.) On the basis of said complaint of the prosecutrix, FIR No. 392/2012 was registered on 17.11.2012 at Police Station, Nurpur. Thereafter, investigation was carried out by the police and in the course of investigation, SHO prepared site plans of hotel Vatika at Bohad and hotel Span Spa at Khushinagar, Nurpur as well as hotel Midnight at Harnota, wherein prosecutrix was allegedly sexually assaulted by the accused. The Investigating Officer also prepared the site plan of the school where prosecutrix had studied and seized the Sim and Mobile of accused along with his motorcycle. Prosecutrix was got medically examined and details of her mobile call records were also obtained. Thereafter, statements of the witnesses were recorded under Sec. 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.