Back
2014 Supreme(HP) 1025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Rajiv Sharma, Sureshwar Thakur, JJ.
Bhupinder Singh - Appellant
Versus
State of H.P. - Respondent
Cr. Appeal No. 143 of 2010 with Cr. Appeal No. 490 of 2010
Decided on : August 26, 2014
For the appellant(s) :Mr. G.C. Gupta, Sr. Advocate, with Ms. Meera Devi, Advocate for appellant in Cr. Appeal No. 143 of 2010. None for the appellant in Cr. Appeal No. 490 of 2010.
For the respondent: Mr. M.A. Khan, Addl. AG, Mr. Vivek Singh Attri, Dy. AG and Mr. Ramesh Thakur, Asstt. AG.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove charges beyond reasonable doubt, the importance of credible evidence, and the benefit of doubt in favor of the accused.
Headnote:
Criminal Appeal - Rape - Sections 376, 452 and 323 IPC - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the evidence and legal provisions related to Sections 376, 452, and 323 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and highlighted the lack of evidence for the charges, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
Fact of the Case:
The prosecutrix alleged that the accused forcibly entered her house, assaulted her, and raped her. The court analyzed the evidence and found discrepancies in the prosecutrix's statements, lack of evidence for the charges, and reasonable doubt in the prosecution's version.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt, highlighted discrepancies in the statements, and acquitted the accused due to the benefit of doubt.
Issues: The issues revolved around the credibility of the prosecutrix's statements, evidence of the alleged assault and rape, and the lack of proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the lack of evidence, discrepancies in the statements, and the failure of the prosecution to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, the judgment of conviction and sentence was set aside, and the accused was acquitted of all charges. The fine amount, if deposited, was ordered to be refunded, and the accused was directed to be released from jail.
Justice Rajiv Sharma, J.
The appellant-accused has infact filed two appeals against the judgment dated 19.3.2010, bearing Cr. Appeal No. 143 of 2010 and Cr. Appeal No. 490 of 2010. The Registry should not have accepted the second appeal bearing Cr. Appeal No. 490 of 2010, preferred by the same person against the judgment dated 19.3.2010. Cr. Appeal No. 490 of 2010 is thus dismissed, being not maintainable.
Cr. Appeal No. 143 of 2010.
2. This appeal has been instituted against the judgment dated 19.3.2010 and consequent order dated 22.3.2010, rendered by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Hamirpur, in Sessions Trial No. 4 of 2010, whereby the appellant-accused (hereinafter referred to as the accused), who was charged with and tried for offences under Sections 376, 452 and 323 IPC, has been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for a period of three months under Section 452 of the IPC and also sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for one month under Section 323 of the IPC. He was further convicted under Section 376(1) IPC and sentenced to undergo twelve years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months simple imprisonment. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
3. The case of the prosecution, in a nut shell, is that on 21.8.2009, the prosecutrix (PW-1) was present in her house situated at village Ladyoh. She was all alone in the house at about 9:30/10:00 PM and was watching TV in her bed room. Accused, all of a sudden, entered her room. On asking the purpose of his visit, he gave kick blow and gagged her mouth with Dupatta and put off her salwar and committed rape on her person. The prosecutrix resisted the rape but accused in order to control her body, pushed her, as a result of which, her head struck with the bed. She sustained injuries on her forehead etc. While committing rape, the volume of the TV was increased by the accused and she fell un-conscious and in the morning of 22.8.2009 at about 8:00 AM, her neighbourer Manorma Devi was called by her and the entire incident was narrated to her. On information given to the police, the spot was inspected and her statement was also recorded, on the basis of which, FIR under Sections 376, 452 and 323 IPC was recorded. The shirt, salwar and dupatta of the prosecutrix was taken into possession in accordance with law alongwith the broken pieces of bangles and hair. The medical examination of the prosecutrix PW-1 was got conducted from lady doctor Rajneesh Thakur, RH Hamirpur. The vaginal slides and swab were also retained for examination by the FSL. These were safely sent to FSL and on receipt of the FSL report, investigation was completed and challan was put up after completing all the codal formalities.
4. The prosecution has examined as many as 13 witnesses. The statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded. The accused has denied that he trespassed into the house of the prosecutrix, voluntarily caused hurt on her person and raped her. According to him, PW-1 had called him to her house and on his knocking the door, PW-1 opened the bolt of the door and he entered the room. Accordingly, PW-4 Manorma Devi had since noticed his entry, PW-1 felt insulted and asked him to leave the spot. The accused has also examined three witnesses in defence. The learned Trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused, as stated hereinabove.
5. We have heard learned counsel for both the sides and gone through the material available on record very carefully.
6. PW-1 has testified that her husband Jagdish Chand resides at village Ladyoh alongwith her son Ajay. Her daughters have already been married. Her son Ajay is als
