Order

DR. ARUIT PASAYAT, J.- Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Himachal Pradesh High Court directing acquittal of the respondent (hereinafter referred to as "the accused"). The learned Sessions Judge, Kangra at Dharamshala had found the accused guilty of offences punishable under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of the Penal Code, 1860 (in short "IPC") and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and two years and fine with default stipulation.

2. The prosecution version as unfolded during trial is as follows:

The prosecutrix (PW 2), daughter of Nirmala Devi (PW 1) and Jagar Nath (PW 3) was, on 23-3-1996 present in her house in Village Sadwan. The accused and Ishwar Dass alias Sheru (who was a co-accused before the trial court and will be referred to as such hereafter) came to her house. The accused asked her to marry him. On her refusal, the accused and the said co-accused threatened to kill her brother. They made her to accompany them at the point of a knife and was taken to different houses and finally to the house of Ashok Kumar (who was also a co-accused before the trial court and is referred to as such hereafter). From there, she was brought to Kunalpathri Temple for performing marriage with the accused. But she refused and the priests also refused to perform the marriage.

3. The accused and the co-accused then took the prosecutrix to the court premises at Dharamshala where she was forced to sign an affidavit regarding solemnisation of her marriage with the accused and such affidavit along with the affidavit of the accused to the same effect were attested by R.S. Rana, Advocate (PW 5). She was then taken back to the house of co-accused Ashok Kumar at Shahpur where she stayed for five days and during this period, the accused subjected her to sexual intercourse.

4. When the mother of the prosecutrix (PW 1) returned home from the fields, she found the prosecutrix missing and started searching for her in the neighbourhood and also at her parents house and finally reported the matter to the police on 26-3-1996 on the basis of which formal FIR, Ext. PW-l/ A was registered at Police Station Nurpur by ASI Sharif Mohammad (PW 10). The father of the prosecutrix (PW 3) who was, at the material time, working at Kullu was informed about the occurrence whereupon he returned home.

5. On the basis of information received, the police along with PW 3 recovered the prosecutrix from the house of co-accused Ashok Kumar vide memo Ext. PW-3/A and she was handed over to PW 3 vide memo Ext. PW-3/B. The prosecutrix was got medically examined and Dr. D.R. Royal (PW 12) who examined her issued the MLC, Ext. PW-12/B and opined that the possibility of sexual intercourse qua the prosecutrix could not be ruled out. At the time of medical examination of the prosecutrix, PW 12 took in possession the underwear which the prosecutrix was wearing at the relevant time and also collected vaginal swab, prepared the slides and after sealing, handed them over to the police to get them analysed from the chemical examiner.

6. After arrest, the accused was also got medically examined and Dr. a Praveen Bhardwaj who examined him vide MLC, Ext. PW-13/ A opined that the accused was capable of performing sexual intercourse. At the time of medical examination, his underwear was also taken in possession by PW 13 and handed over to the police for chemical analysis. As per the report regarding chemical analysis of the aforesaid articles, Ext. PX nothing incriminating was found in the articles so analysed, except the underwear of b the prosecutrix which was found stained with human blood.

7. During the course of the investigation, the police also took possession of the age certificate, Ext. PW-14/ A of the prosecutrix and the abstract of the register, Ext. PW--14/B. On completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet under Sections 363, 366, 368 and 376 IPC was submitted by the officer-in- c charge, Police Station Nurpur