Back
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
A.P.Chowdhri, J.
Ram Lal
Versus
State Of Punjab And Haryana
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 9-SB of 1986,
of,
Decided On : JANUARY 15, 1991
Rape - Prosecution Evidence - Indian Penal Code, Section 366, Section 376, Section 511, Section 109 - Summary: The court discussed the testimony of the prosecutrix, the conduct of the accused, and the absence of certain physical evidence. The court found the prosecutrix's testimony to be reliable, emphasizing her simple and credulous nature. The court also noted that the absence of physical evidence did not weaken the prosecution's case. The appeals were dismissed, and the accused were ordered to surrender to serve their remaining sentence.
Fact of the Case:
The prosecutrix, a married woman, was raped by multiple accused after being misled and taken to different locations. The accused were convicted based on the testimony of the prosecutrix and other supporting evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the testimony of the prosecutrix to be reliable, emphasizing her simple and credulous nature. The absence of certain physical evidence was not considered as weakening the prosecution's case.
Issues: Reliability of the prosecutrix's testimony, absence of physical evidence, and withholding of material evidence by the prosecution.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the reliability of the prosecutrix's testimony, considering her simple and credulous nature. The absence of certain physical evidence was not deemed as weakening the prosecution's case. The non-examination of certain witnesses was also considered as not affecting the prosecution's case.
Final Decision: The appeals were dismissed, and the accused were ordered to surrender to serve their remaining sentence.
, J.
1. This judgment will dispose of four Criminal Appeals Nos.9-SB, 18-SB, 98- SB and 194-SB of 1986 arising out of the judgment and order of the Additional Session Judge, Chandigarh, dated 17.12.1985 convicting and sentencing the appellants. Ram Lal (28) was convicted under sections 366 and 376, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for two years and seven years and fine of Rs.500/- on the two counts respectively. In default of payment of fine under the second count, he was sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for three months. Vikram Singh (17) was convicted under section 376, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs.500/-. In default of payment of fine, he was further sentenced to three months Rigorous Imprisonment Shekhar (45) was convicted under section 376/511, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for three years and a fine of Rs.300/-. In default of payment of fine, he was further sentenced to three months Rigorous Imprisonment. Smt Narmata (50) was convicted under section 376/511 read with section 109, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for three years and a fine of Rs.300/-. In default of payment of fine, she was further sentenced to three monthst Rigorous Imprisonment. Out of fine, if realised, Rs.1500/- were directed to be paid to the prosecutrix as compensation:
2. According to the prosecution, the prosecutrix Smt. Shanti P. W.-7, aged 25, a married woman and mother of two children, came to Chandigarh on 31.3.1985 to see her cousin sister named Rani who was living in house No.1281, Sector 18-C, Chandigarh. This was her first visit to Chandigarh. She had come leaving her children at her mothers house at Amritsar. She took a cycle rickshaw and went to the aforesaid house in Sector 18-C where some lady told her that her cousin had shifted to some house in the market of Sector 19 a week earlier. She went by the same cycle rickshaw to Sector 19 market where Ram Lal who is a meat seller met her and taking advantage of the simplicity of the girl he told her that he knew her cousin Rani and that he would take her to Rani. The prosecutrix believed Ram Lal and accompanied him in an auto-rickshaw. Ram Lal took her to house No.17 in Sector 30. Vikram, who is an employee of Ram Lal, came there. At the instance of Ram Lal, Vikram brought half bottle of liquor which was consumed by both Ram Lal and Vikram. Thereafter Ram Lal committed rape on Shanti, Ram Lal having given her a threat after slapping her that if she tried to raise an alarm she would meet dire consequences. After Ram Lal, Vikram also committed rape on the prosecutrix. Thereafter one person Guddu came there. The prosecutrix narrated her tale of woe. Guddu assured her that he would take her to his uncles house. At about 8 p. m. they left the place and met an old man who was addressed as Dada by Guddu. Accordingly the old man left the prosecutrix at house No.227, Sector 29 after getting recorded a writing from the old man Exhibit P. W.7/i. The writing is to the effect that the old man was leaving the prosecutrix in the care of Shekhar for the night. In that building besides Shekhar, Smt. Narmata was also living. Narmata told Shekhar that the prosecutrix was a woman of loose character and he should have sex with her. The prosecutrix was slapped by Narmata, whereafter Shekhar tried to commit rape with her at about 9.30 p. m. after bolting the room from inside. Shekhar paid no heed to the entreaties made by the prosecutrix that she was a married woman, implying that her life would be blasted if rape was committed on her. She managed to get herself freed and raised an alarm. Adjoining that building, where Shekhar had tried to commit rape with the prosecutrix, is an Inspection Bungalow of Ordinance Cable Factory where Tara Chand Chowkidar P. W.-4 was on duty. He heard the alarm. After some time his officer Charan Singh P. W.-5 turned up and the Chowkidar n
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
