IDAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE accused-petitioner Idan-singh along with four other persons, was prosecuted in the court of Assistant Sessions Judge, Balotra, under Sections 376, 366, 452 and 147, I. P. C. , for forcibly abducting P. W. 6 Jadav and committing rape upoa her. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge acquitted threa accused, namely, Sonaram, Madhosingh and Jodharam, tried along with the petitioner. He, however, convicted the accused-petitioner Idansingh under Sections 376, 366 and 452, I. P. C. The other accused Aman Singh was also convicted under Section 366 and 452, I. P. C. , and both of them were sentenced to various terms of imprisonment under each count. Petitioner Idansingh and the other co-accused Aman-singh preferred an appeal, which came up for decision before the Additional Sessions Judge, Jalore, Camp Balotra, who acquitted the other co-accused Amansingh, but maintained the conviction and sentence recorded against the accused-petitioner Idansingh by his judgment dated March 29, 1973. Hence this revision petition.

(2.) THE prosecution case, as disclosed at the trial, is that P. W. 6 Jadav, an unmarried girl between the age of 17 to 19, was living with her father P. W. 1 Javarsingh in his Dhani. On the intervening night of 2nd and 3rd February, 1968, P. W. 1 Javersingh, P. W. 6 Jadav, her brother Pratap and her mother, who was blind and dumb, were sleeping in the Dhani of Javar Singh. Accused Idansingh, Amansingh, Madho Singh, Sona and Jodha formed an unlawful assembly, armed themselves with lathis'. The common object of the assembly was to abduct P. W. 6 Jadav with an intention to compel her to marry Idan Singh against her will or to be forced or seduced to illicit intercomse against her wishes by accused Idansingh. In prosecution of the common object all the five accused came in a Jeep belonging to P. W. 16 Himmatsingh, to the Dhani of P. W. 1 Javar singh. Javarsing (P. W. 1) and his son Pratap were belaboured by Idansingh and others. Idansingh forcibly lifted and dragged P. W. 6 Jadav, placed her in the Jeep, which was awaiting at a little distance from the Dhani of Javarsingh. Thereafter all the five accused boarded the Jeep. The accused took the Jeep to the village Kolu. In the way Idansingh placed his hand on the mouth of P. W. 6 Jadav so that she may not raise hue and cry. It has also come in the prosecution evidence that one of the accused threatened her for life with a knife, P. W. 9 Kishoresingh saw the petitioner in the company of P. W. 6 Jadav. At that time he noticed that the girl was sobbing. When the party of the accused reached at village Kolu the girl was made to alight in the Dhani of P. W. 10 Hamirsingh. Accused Idansingh obtained clothes from Hamirsingh's mother and compelled P. W. 6 Jadav to change her clothes. Thereafter she was taken to the Dhani of Hamir Singh's sister, which was known as Jethusingh's Dhani. It is alleged that in the Jhumpa of Jethusingh Idansingh committed rape upon P. W. 6 Jadav against her wishes and other accused Amansingb stood on watch outside the Jhumpa.

(3.) FROM the Dhani of Jethusingh she was taken to Baba's Dhani. In the day time she was kept in a house and in the night she was taken to the Jhumpa. Outside the Jhumpa the other accused Amansingh and Baba slept and Idansingh again committed rape upon P. W. 6 Jadav. On the next day she was taken to the Dhani of Maghsingh. In between this period P. W. 1 Javarsingh gave a written report of the occurrence (Ex. P/l) at Police Station, Samdari, on 3-2-1968. A formal first information report in the prescribed form was also drawn, which has been marked as Ex. P/17. Tht police after registering the case under Sections 147, 452, 366, I. P. C. chased the accused. On 8-2-1968 the police party reached at the Dhani of Maghsingh where Idansingh and Amansingh were arrested and P. W. 6 Jadav was also recovered. The recovery memo containing all the details regarding the recovery of the girl and the seizure of the articles is Ex. P/6. Pt W. 6 Jadav was clinically examined by P. W. 8 Dr. Subudhimal. The report of the Doctor is Ex. P/ll. On the advice of the Doctor X-ray was taken. The X-ray plates are Ex. P/12 and Ex. P/13 and the report given on the basis of the X-ray examination of tiae girl is Ex. P/14. The police after usual investigation submitted a challan in the Court of S. D. M. Balotra, against five accused persons including the petitioner, who were ultimately tried by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Balotra. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charges and the prosecution examined seventeen witnesses in support of their case. The accused in their statements recorded under Section 342, Cr. P. C. denied their complicity in the crime. The case of accused Idansingh before the trial court was that P. W. 6 Jadav was his married wife and as she was being married again to Pepsingh, he went in the company of some other persons to the house of P. W. 1 Javarsingh and asked Javarsingh's wife to intervene, who readily agreed and thereafter Javarsingh's wife, Idansingh and other persons came to the Dhani of Maghsingh, hut to his ill luck by this time P. W. 6 Jadav was already married to. Pepsingh. Idansingh protested and stated that he will seek the help of Panchayat for intervention. Javarsingh feeling guilty of his act gave the first information report Ex. P/l as a counterblast In support of his case the accused examined 10 witnesses in defence. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge disbelieved the defence version. Placing reliance on the statements of P. W. 1 Javarsingh, P. W. 6 Jadav, P. W. 16 Himmat Singh, he held that P. W. 6 Jadav was forcibly abducted by accused Idansingh and Amansingh and others from the house of P. W. 1 Javarsingh. He further held that P. W. 6 Jadav was taken against her wishes to village Kolu and thereafter to the Dhani of Jethusingh and Baba's Dhanis She was also raped in the Jhumpas of Baba and Jethusingh by accused Idansingh. The learned Judge held the accused Idansingh and Amansingh guilty of the charges framed against them. He, however, extended the benefit of doubt to the three accused. In appeal the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalore, Camp Balotra, acquitted Amansingh, but upheld the conviction and sentence recorded against Idansingh by the trial court.