JUDGMENT

Sanjay Kumar Gupta, J.—State is in appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 29.11.2013 passed by learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu, in case FIR No.45/2006 of Police Station Gharota, by virtue of which, the accused-respondents have been acquitted of the offences under Sections 366/343/376/34/109 of Ranbir Penal Code.

2. State has also filed an application seeking leave to appeal as also application for condonation of delay of 214 days in preferring the appeal.

3. For the reasons mentioned in the condonation application, we are satisfied that a sufficient case for condoning the delay is made out. Delay of 214 days in filing the appeal is condoned. Cond. (Cr.) No.222/2014 is disposed of.

4. For the purpose of grant of leave to appeal, we deemed it appropriate to go through the merits of the appeal. However, in order to satisfy ourselves, we have with the able assistance of learned Govt. Advocate, gone over the judgment passed by learned trial Court and are of the view that the conclusions reached therein resulting in the acquittal of the respondents do not warrant any interference by this Court in view of the reasons mentioned hereunder:-

Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 18.4.2006, Kaka Ram, PW-4, father of the prosecutrix lodged a missing report EXT-P-2 to the police station, Gharota to the effect that on 17.4.2006 at 9.00 a.m., prosecutrix went out of the house to visit a bank situated at ‘Karwanda’ in order to withdraw some money, who did not return back till late in the evening due to which he made frantic search to locate her whereabouts with his relatives and at other places but no clue was found. After an entry No. 19 in the Daily Diary register of 18.4.2006 was made with regard to the missing of prosecutrix, police started her search but she was not found. On 14.7.2006, prosecutrix with her mother PW-3, Jyoti Devi, came to the aforesaid police station where her statement was recorded in which she had given her age as 20 years. She had alleged that on 17.4.2006, at 12’o clock in the noon, she came out of the bank after withdrawing Rs. 800/- and was standing on the roadside waiting for a matador, in the meantime, accused persons came on spot who made her unconscious after forcing her to sniff some medicine and later she found herself at Arnia after regaining her consciousness where A-1 committed rape with her against her will and thereafter she was taken to Katra. She has further stated in her statement that she was again raped by A-1 at Katra where she was kept for 7/8 days and thereafter she was taken to Udhampur and was kept there for a period of 1½ month where her signatures were taken on some papers forcibly and finally she was taken to Kaluchak by them, where A-1 again raped her. She succeeded in getting herself rescued from the clutches of the accused with great difficulty and returned back to her house. Some ornaments belonging to her were left in a packet at Kaluchak. On the aforesaid statement of the prosecutrix, a case under sections 366/376 RPC was registered and investigation commenced, during the course of which statements of witnesses including prosecutrix were recorded. She was also medically examined from Govt. hospital. It came to fore in the investigation that prosecutrix was abducted by A-1 with the help of other accused on 17.4.2006 from roadside near Karwanda village and was taken to different places at Arnia, Katra, Udhampur and Kaluchak during the course of which she was repeatedly raped by A-1. The final report under section 173 Cr.P.C. was filed in the court of learned CJM, Jammu on 4.5.2007 which was committed to the court of learned Sessions Judge, Jammu.

Vide order dated 23.8.2007 A-1 was charged for the commission of offence under sections 366/376/343 RPC, whereas other accused were charged for the commission of offence under sections 366/343/34/109 RPC, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution in support of its case has examined