Judgment

DUA, J.:- This appeal is by special leave from the judgment of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 913 of 1966. The appellant, Ram Murti, along with Suresh Kumar, Pratap Singh and Prem Kumar Mittal, was tried in the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala on charges under Sections 366, 366-A 376, Indian Penal Code. Pratap Singh, Suresh and Prem Kumar Mittal were given benefit of doubt and acquitted. According to the Trial Court, the prosecutrix Satnam Kaur, a student of 9th class, Dev Samaj Girls High School, Ambala City, had improved upon her earliest version in respect of these accused and the possibility of falsely implicating them by herself or at the instance of Shri Hari Ram, Assistant Sub-Inspector, could not be reasonably ruled out. The appellant was, however, held to be the chief and real culprit and was accordingly convicted under Sections 366 and 376, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to 5 years rigorous imprisonment on each count. The sentences were ordered to be concurrent. It was observed that the appellant did not deserve any leniency because being a medical practitioner and a teacher he had taken undue advantage of his position in both capacitates. On appeal the High Court acquitted him of the charge under Section 376, Indian Penal Code but maintained his conviction and sentence under Section 366, Indian Penal Code. On appeal by special leave in this Court the appellant challenges his conviction and sentence. The appellant is not represented by counsel. He is on bail and is not present in Court; but he has submitted written arguments and has requested that they may be considered in his absence.

2. The prosecution story, as given by the prosecutrix, may now be broadly stated. Satnam Kaur, the prosecutrix, daughter of Hans Raj, a refugee from West Pakistan, was a student of 9th class, Dev Samaj High School, Ambala City at the relevant time. One Sumitra Devi was also studying with her in the same class. Ram Murthi, appellant, a medical practitioner also used to teach in this school. He used to take three periods a week of the 9th class. The annual examination in the school concluded on March 23, 1965 and on the following day there was some function in the school. After the function, on March 24, 1965, Sumitra Devi took Satnam Kaur to the appellant s house so that he may disclose to them the marks secured by them in the examination. This was pursuant to the appellant s message conveyed through Sumitra Devi. Both these girls reached the appellant s house at about 6 or 7 p.m. A car was parked in front of that house. The driver was sitting in the car and Pratap Singh was standing near it. The appellant took both the girls inside the house and entertained them to tea. He also disclosed to them the marks secured by them in the examination. As the tea tested somewhat bitter and Satnam Kaur felt slight headache, she requested the appellant to take her to her house. The appellant promised to do so. As Sumitra Devi went upstairs to talk to the appellant s wife Satnam Kaur was taken by the appellant to the car. Partap Singh and Suresh Kumar also got into it. Instead of taking her to her own house she was taken to Suresh s house where all of them had sexual intercourse with her against her will and without her consent. Outside that house the driver of the car threatened her that she would be killed if she refused to go in or raised alaram. At midnight they took her to Ambala Cantonment in the same car and in the shop of a tailor behind Nigar Cinema, the key of which was with Suresh, they again raped her under threat of life. In the morning at about 4 or 5 a.m. they took her to the house of Prem Mittal in Prem Nagar. Prem Mittal was in the house. After leaving Satnam Kaur there the appellant and the driver of the car locked the front door of the house and went away. In the evening Ram Murti returned, entering the house by the back door. At night Prem Mittal had sexual intercourse with her again