SANTOKH SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant Santokh Singh has been found guilty of an offence under Ss. 376, 450, 363, 323 and 324 of the IPC by the Addl. Sessions Judge No. 2, Hanumangarh. He has been sentenced to life imprisonment with Rs. 500/- as fine, five years of rigorous imprisonment with Rs. 200/- as fine, three years of rigorous imprisonment, six months simple imprisonment and six months simple imprisonment respectively for the aforesaid offences.

(2.) The case against the appellant is that on 23rd June, 1991 in the afternoon he took away Snehlata, aged 9 years from the house of her parents to the nearby field and had forcible sexual inter-course with her. When Snehlata's mother who was sleeping in the house found that her daughter was not there, she tried to search her along with a neighbour Krishan Kumar. They were told by some boys that she was taken by the Bavri, member of a Barat which had come in the neighbourhood, to the field behind the house of the victim. Vimla, mother of Snehlata and Krishan Kumar went to the field and got a glimpse of the accused in the act. On seeing them, he ran away leaving one of his shoe behind. Vimla then went to Kulchandra village and informed her husband Om Prakash who arrived in the village and complained to the Panchayat and when the Panchayat failed to do justice in the matter he lodged the report on the advise of the Panchayat. The report was thus, lodged on the next day on 24th June, 1991 at 6.30 p.m. After investigation trial was held which resulted in the aforesaid convictions and sentences.

(3.) The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the FIR was lodged more than 24 hours after the offence was committed and there was no explanation for the delay. According to the learned counsel the complainants were groping in the dark about the person who had committed the rape and, therefore, could not lodge immediate FIR naming the culprit. According to the appellant the defence version that rape was committed by three boys of the village who were brought before the Panchayat and who had admitted the guilt before the Panchayat appears to be probable. It was contended that what transpired before the Panchayat has also been suppressed by the prosecution from the Court. Heavy reliance was placed on the statement of PW-6 Santosh Kumar, the brother of the victim. It was further contended that from the evidence it is clear that near by the spot from which the victim was alleged to have been taken away by the accused person 100 to 150 people were under the Kikar tree and it was not possible that their attention would not be attracted to forcibly taking away of the girl from her house. It was also contended that the medical evidence did not show any injury on the external genital parts of the accused which gave a complete lie to the story that he had raped a nine year old girl. Lastly it was contended that the sentence was too harsh in the circumstances of the case.