Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
T.S. Thakur, Gyan Sudha Misra, JJ.
PURAN CHAND – APPELLANT
VERSUS
STATE OF H.P. – RESPONDENT
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1708 OF 2010
Decided On : 23-04-2014
Facts of the Case –
Appellant herein in the instant case was prosecuted for committing rape on a minor girl of 17 years. Trial Court convicted appellant for said offence. Appeal thereagainst was Dismissed by High Court.
B. Present appeal has been filed against said order of High Court –
Findings of the Court – In an incident of this nature where a doubt is sought to be created by the defence relying upon the lacuna in the medical evidence which could not establish the incident in view of non – committal statement of the doctor regarding the hymen being intact, the prosecution version could not be brushed aside totally and would have to be judged by the other attending circumstances brought on record. The version of the victim girl who was suffering the trauma of rape and was provoked to take the extreme step of consuming poison, could not be doubted ignoring even the fact that a girl would put herself to disrepute and go to the extent of supporting her parents to lodge a false case merely due to some enmity with the family of the accused putting her honour at stake in a precarious mental state. Relying upon the amended Section 114 – A of the Indian Evidence Act, even if there had been a doubt about the medical evidence regarding non rupture of hymen the same would be of no consequence as it is well settled that the offence of rape would be held to have been proved even if there is an attempt of rape on the woman and not the actual commission of rape. Delay in lodging FIR was sufficiently explained. Instantly in view of the evidence led by the witnesses, supported by the circumstantial evidence, the prosecution version held fit to be relied upon brushing aside the theory of improbability of the offence and holding the prosecution case proved beyond reasonable doubt, leading to the conclusion that the incident in fact did happen in the manner in which it had been described by the victim girl who was only 17 years and hence a minor at the time of the incident supported by the medical evidence which although might be somewhat weak, gains strength from other attending circumstantial evidence wherein there was no missing link in the chain of events. Appeal having no merit was dismissed
Result – Appeal dismissed
JUDGMENT
GYAN SUDHA MISRA, J. –
1. This appeal was going unrepresented as no one had appeared for the appellant to contest the matter. We, therefore, in the interest of justice, appointed an Amicus Curiae to represent the case of the appellant and assist the Court in reaching to a just conclusion.
2. Having heard the counsel for the parties and on perusal of the material on record, we have noted that this appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 29.09.2009 passed by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla in Criminal Appeal No.52/2009 whereby the appeal preferred by the appellant was dismissed by the High Court. Consequently, the conviction of the appellant under Section 376 read with Section 506 – I of the Indian Penal Code was upheld and the sentence of seven years imposed on the appellant/accused alongwith a fine of Rs.5,000/ – in default of which he had to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year under Section 376 IPC and further to undergo simple imprisonment for three months under Section 506 – I IPC, was confirmed.
3. The case of the prosecution which led to the conviction and sentence of the appellant emerges out of the FIR No.186/2006 which was registered at Police Station Nahan by the prosecutrix/the victim girl aged 17 years who suffered the offence of rape at the instance of the appellant. She has stated in the FIR that on 20.08.2006 at about 12.30 p.m., she had taken her goats for grazing in the forest at a distance of about ½ k.m. from the village. She was sitting alone on a foot path, at about 2 p.m. when somebody caught hold of her from her back and then she found out that it was the accused – appellant who had forcibly caught hold of her. She enquired the reason for holding her to which the accused did not respond. The appellant thereafter physically abused her body specially the chest portion removed her clothes made her lie on the ground and inflicted sexual assault by committing rape on her. In panic, she raised alarm but none came to her rescue or for help. The accused – appellant after raping her left the place and threatened her that in case she disclosed the incident to anyone, she will have to pay for the consequence of disclosing the incident. It has been stated by the victim – girl that on account of this fear, she did not disclose this incident to her parents for several days but she remained tense on account of trauma that she had been suffering due to the heinous incident. However, the tension that brewed in her mind, increased so much that on 02.09.2006, she attempted to commit suicide by consuming some poison and she became unconscious after which she was admitted into the Hospital at Dadahu and then shifted to Nahan and finally to the PGI, Chandigarh. On regaining her consciousness, she disclosed the incident to her parents and brother Ramesh Chand. She was discharged from PGI, Chandigarh on 10.09.2006 and thereafter she reported the case at Police Station Nahan.
4. The prosecutrix/victim girl was then subjected to medical examination and the case was investigated by PW – 9 ASI Jagdish Chand. The accused was arrested on 12.09.2006 and on completion of investigation, chargesheet was submitted in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nahan who committed the case vide order dated 19.05.2007 for trial.
5. In support of the case of victim girl, the prosecution examined 11 witnesses and also produced documentary evidence. The accused was also examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. who denied the prosecution case and took the plea that the witnesses have deposed against him due to previous enmity. However, the learned Session Judge on a scrutiny of the evidence and on conclusion of the trial, convicted and sentenced the accused as noted above.
6. The appellant preferred an appeal before the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla against the judgment and order of the Trial Court, wherein he reiterated his defence version that he had been falsely implicated in the case
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
