PANNA LAL Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT is aggrieved by the judgment of the trial Court whereby he has been convicted of an offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs. 20,000/ -; in case of non -payment of fine to undergo imprisonment for a further period of one year and out of the amount of fine, if realized, a sum of Rs. 10,000/ - has been ordered to be paid to the prosecutrix, by way of compensation.

(2.) ALLEGATIONS on which the appellant was put on trial may be summoned up thus. The prosecutrix, who was examined as PW -11 in the trial Court, was 12 years of age in the month of April, 2005. She had been admitted to a Government Primary School situated at a distance of about 1 km. from her house a week before the occurrence, which took place on 4th April, 2005. On the day of alleged occurrence, she left her house in village Khamrala, as usual, at 9.45 a.m. On the way, the appellant, who was coming from the side of village Sayanjali, overpowered her and carried her to a lonely place in the fields by the side of village path and committed rape on her. After committing the rape, the appellant went away. The prosecutrix wore her salwar and went to the school. She returned home around 1 or 2 p.m. and took both and washed the clothes, which she was wearing at the time of the incident. Thereafter, she took her meals and went to sleep. Next day, she did not go to the school. On the third day, she again did not go to the school. and complained to her mother that she was having pain in her vagina. Her mother, PW -4 Mani Devi, examined her vagina and noticed that it was bleeding. On enquiry, the prosecutrix told her mother that the appellant had dishonoured her. The mother of the prosecutrix then went to the house of the appellant. He himself was not present there, but his mother was present. When the mother of the prosecutrix complained to the mother of the appellant about the incident, she (the mother of the appellant) told her that she was not having cordial relations with the appellant and that she (the mother of the prosecutrix) herself could talk to him about the incident. That very day a brother -in -law of the mother of the prosecutrix, named Bhajan Lal, came to her house. She asked him to telephonically inform her husband on telephone but could not succeed. The mother of the prosecutrix waited for the return of her husband. On 13th April, 2005, the appellant went to the house of the prosecutrix and threatened her and her mother and hurled abuses at them. The same day, the mother of the prosecutrix left for the Police Station. The distance between the village of the prosecutrix and the Police Station being 42 kms., the prosecutrix and her mother stayed for the night in village Banch at the house of the parents of the mother of the prosecutrix. Next day, they reached the Police Station at 8 p.m. and lodged the report. The entire distance was covered by the prosecutrix and her mother on foot. Report was lodged at the Police Station by the prosecutrix, which was recorded in the form of FIR Ex.PK.

(3.) CHALLAN was filed against the appellant for offences punishable under Section 3(2)(v) of the Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. The trial Court charged the appellant with both the offences. At the end of the trial, he was acquitted of the charge under Section 3 of the Schedule Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, but convicted of the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced as aforesaid.