Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J., Chander Bhusan Barowalia, J.
State Of Himachal Pradesh - Appellant
Versus
Ranvir Kumar & Ors. - Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 167 of 2010
Decided On : 16-03-2018
IPC - Offence of Section 376(ii)(g) read with Section 34 IPC - [IPC 1860, Section 376(ii)(g), Section 34] - The court discussed the prosecution's case, medical evidence, and witness testimonies to determine the guilt of the accused. The judgment highlighted the lack of corroboration between the prosecutrix's testimony and medical evidence, as well as the non-supportive statements of key prosecution witnesses. The court emphasized the principles of appellate review and the need for substantial and compelling reasons to reverse an acquittal. Ultimately, the court found the prosecutrix's testimony uncorroborated and untrustworthy, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.
Fact of the Case:
The prosecutrix alleged that she was forcibly raped by the accused, but the medical evidence did not support her claims. Key prosecution witnesses did not corroborate her testimony, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the prosecutrix's testimony uncorroborated and untrustworthy, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.
Issues: Lack of corroboration between the prosecutrix's testimony and medical evidence, non-supportive statements of key prosecution witnesses, and the principles of appellate review.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for substantial and compelling reasons to reverse an acquittal and found the prosecutrix's testimony uncorroborated and untrustworthy.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the acquittal of the accused was upheld.
JUDGMENT
Chander Bhusan Barowalia, J —The present appeal is maintained by the appellant/State, laying challenge to judgment dated 22.10.2009, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, H.P., in Sessions Trial No. 4/7 of 2007, whereby the accused/respondents (hereinafter referred to as "the accused persons") were acquitted for the commission of offence punishable under Section 376(ii) (g) read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860) (hereinafter referred to as "IPC") .
2. The background facts, as projected by the prosecution, can succinctly be summarized as under:
On 24.11.2006, the prosecutrix had gone to the house of her sister, Smt. Anita Devi, at Badhaghat and on 26.11.2006, on her return journey, she took bus from Badhaghat and alighted at Nihari. Therefrom she took lift in the vehicle of Nikku, who was her acquaintance, and came to Dangar. At Dangar she went to sewing centre for her enrolment. Thereafter, she started to her village on foot and when she was walking on kacha road a jeep, having registration No. HP23A-4344, was parked there. Accused Sanjiv @ Pappi was sitting on the driver seat and accused Ranvir and Manohar Lal were also sitting in the jeep. Accused, Ranvir Kumar, whom the prosecutrix knew, offered lift to the prosecutrix and told her that they are going towards Patta side. The prosecutrix took lift, but accused persons instead of going towards Patta went towards Nihari side. The prosecutrix objected and accused Ranvir Kumar gagged her mouth. She was taken to Ballu nallah, a secluded place. Accused Ranvir Kumar dragged the prosecutrix to the nearby nallah and the other accused persons acted as watchmen. Accused Ranvir Kumar raped the prosecutrix. As per the story of the prosecution, while accused was doing sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix, Smt. Jai Devi, was working in her field and she saw the accused coming in the vehicle. Subsequently, Smt. Jai Devi also saw accused Ranvir Kumar coming upward and he was being followed by the prosecutrix. The prosecutrix and accused Ranvir Kumar were also spotted by Shri Tilak Raj, Smt. Panno Devi, Smt. Geetan Devi and Smt. Kamla Devi. Shri Tilak Raj got injured in an attempt to apprehend accused Ranvir Kumar. When the prosecutrix was being inquired by Shri Tilak Raj, Smt. Kamla Devi, Smt. Geetan Devi and Smt. Jai Devi, the accused persons fled away from the spot. The prosecutrix divulged to Smt. Pano Devi the entire incident. Shri Tilak Raj telephoned Shri Purshotam Ram and Shri Purshotam Ram took the prosecutrix to his house. Shri Purshotam Ram telephonically informed Shri Krishan Chand, brother of the prosecutrix. When the brother of the prosecutrix came there, the prosecutrix narrated the incident to him. In the interregnum, the parents of the prosecutrix got worried and started inquiring about the prosecutrix. They alongwith one Shri Bishan Dass went towards Dangar, where they met the prosecutrix and Shri Krishan Chand, who narrated the incident to them. Thereafter, the prosecutrix alongwith her parents went to police station and lodged a case.
Upon registration of FIR, police investigation ensued and on 27.11.2006 police visited the spot. From the spot an used condom and two pieces of its wrapper were recovered. Condom was taken into possession in presence of Shri Bishan Dass and Shri Balwant Singh and the spot was photographed. Spot map was prepared and accused Ranvir Kumar was arrested and medically examined. Blood samples of the accused were taken and his underwear was preserved and handed over to the police. The prosecutrix was also medically examined and her salwar, shirt, sweater, under vest, underwear and "dupta" were handed over to the police by the doctor. Vaginal swab and pubic hair of the prosecutrix were also taken by the doctor and handed over to the police. On 27.11.2006, in presence of Shri Balwant Singh and Shri Bishan Dass, police took into possession vehicle, having registration No. HP23A-4344, alongwith it
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
