KANA RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the instant appeal under Sec. 374(2) Cr.P.C., the accused appellant Kana Ram has approached this Court for assailing the judgment dtd. 21/7/2014 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge cum Special Court (Women Atrocities and Dowry Cases), Sriganganagar in Sessions Case No.92/2012 whereby, the accused appellant was convicted and sentenced as under:

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the complainant Rajeshwari lodged a written report to the SHO, Police Station Sadulshahar on 5/4/2012 at 1.40 AM that on 4/4/2012, she was alone at her home at 11 PM. The Sarpanch of the village Kana Ram, alongwith two other persons, entered her house after scaling the wall. At that time, she was sleeping in the courtyard. All these three persons tied her mouth by a cloth and took her inside the room. Kana Ram threatened her that if she raised a hue and cry, she would be eliminated. Then he pulled down her Salwar and committed foul things with her. On hearing the noise of a motorcycle, the other two persons escaped from the scene. Her brother in law Mamraj alongwith two other persons came inside her house and apprehended the accused Kana Ram on the spot. Immediately after catching hold of the accused, the Police was called on the spot and the complainant informed the Police about the incident through a written application on the basis whereof, an F.I.R. No.73/2012 was registered at the Police Station Sadulshahar on 5/4/2012 and after completing investigation, a chargesheet came to be filed against the accused Kana Ram for the offences under Ss. 450 and 376 I.P.C. in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sadulshahar. Since the offences were sessions triable, the case was committed and transferred to the Special Court (Women Atrocities and Dowry Cases), Sriganganagar for trial as per law. The trial court framed charges against the accused Kana Ram for the above offences which he denied and claimed trial. The prosecution examined as many as 14 witnesses and got exhibited 22 documents to prove its case. Upon being questioned under Sec. 313 Cr.P.C. and when confronted with the prosecution allegations, the accused denied the same and claimed to have been falsely implicated. A witness namely Surendra Kumar was examined in defence. Upon conclusion of trial, the trial court proceeded to convict and sentence the appellant as above by the impugned judgment dtd. 21/7/2014. Being aggrieved thereby, the instant appeal has been preferred.

(3.) Learned counsel Shri Sandhu though initially tried to buttress that the conviction of the accused as recorded by the trial court is bad on facts as well as in law but after the statements of the material witnesses had been read out and appreciated in the court, he candidly conceded that there is hardly any scope to question or doubt the findings recorded by the trial court in the impugned judgment whereby, reliance was placed on the evidence of the prosecutrix P.W.2 Smt.R, Mamraj P.W.4 and Hetram P.W.7 while holding the appellant guilty of the offences alleged.