STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. HEM RAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE State has come up in appeal against the judgment of acquittal recorded in sessions case No. 108/75 by the learned Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh, dated 31. 1. 1976.

(2.) THE facts of the case briefly stated arc that P. W. 2 Goga is the wife of PW-4 Narain PW-6 Devilal is her father-in-law whereas P. W. 3 Davu is her mother-in-law. THEy belong to village Soodri. It is alleged that in the afternoon of 29. 9. 75 she was all alone in her house and was ready to go out tor fetching water having an empty water pitch on her head. At the time of the occurrence she was in the inner apartment of her house. It is alleged that accused Hemraj came inside the house and enquired about her father-in-law and about the other members of the family. When she told him that her father-in-law has gone to Chittorgarh in order to obtain a permit for cultivating opium and the others have gone to the field the accused, caught hold of her hand, embraced her, felled her down on the ground and committed rape on her and after commission of rape, the accused went out. THEreafter she started crying which attracted the attention of PW-7 Lahroo and P. W. 8 Chhoga. THEy went inside the house and found the lady weeping and enquired from her as to what has happened but on account of a feeling of shame she did not tell anything to them and kept on weeping. She also did not go to filed to inform her mother-in-law and husband about the occurrence but waited at the residence for their arrival in the evening. When they came back in the evening she narrated the entire incident to them but no report was lodged as her father-in-law was not there. THE report of the incident was lodged at police station Gangror on 3. 10. 1975 by Smt. Goga herself. THE F. I. R. has been marked Ex. P. 2. THE medical examination of her injuries were also got conducted. That report has been mar-ked Ex. P. 1. THE site was inspected and the site inspection memo and the site plan have been marked Ex. P. 6 and Ex. P/7 respectively. THE police also seized her 'ghaghara' and 'kanchli' vide seizure memo Ex. P. 3. THE 'dhoti' of the accused was also seized. THEy were sent for chemical and serological examination. THE 'ghaghara' was found positive for blood and semen, and where as the dhoti was found negative for semen and blood THE Serologist report shows that the 'ghaghara' was stained with human blood but no spermatozoa was detected in the 'ghaghara'. THEse two articles were seized on 4. 10. 75. After usual investigation, the case against the accused was challaned in the court of learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Chittorgarh from where it was committed for trial to the court of Sessions Judge. THE learned Sessions Judge charged the accused with the offence u/s 376 I. P. C. THE accused did not plead guilty to the charge and claimed trial whereupon the prosecution examined in all 11 witnesses in support of its case, THE statement of the accused was recorded u/s 313 Cr. P. C. but he has completely denied the happening of this occurrence and has examined D W. 1 Lahru in his defence. After hearing the parties, the learned trial court has acquitted the accused by giving him benefit of doubt. Aggrieved against this judgment, the State has come up in appeal.