2011(2) RCR(Cri) 697
IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT PUNJAB AND HARYANA
JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J.
Jitender alias Chintu and another -Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana -Respondent
Crl. Appeal No.1120-SB of 2000
Decided on: 23.11.2010
Indian Penal Code - Rape - Section 354, Section 376 - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the application of Section 354 and Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code in the context of the case. It highlighted the importance of evidence collection, medical examination, and the credibility of witnesses in cases of sexual offenses. The court emphasized the need for corroborative evidence and the impact of material improvements in the complaint's statement on the genuineness of the prosecution story.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the appeal against the conviction and sentencing of the appellants under Section 354 and Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code for offenses related to teasing and rape of the prosecutrix. The prosecution presented evidence including witness testimonies and medical examination reports. The defense raised concerns about the age of the prosecutrix, the credibility of witnesses, and the genuineness of the prosecution story.
Finding of the Court:
The court found serious flaws in the prosecution's case, including the failure to collect evidence regarding the age of the prosecutrix, inconsistencies in the prosecutrix's statements, and lack of corroborative evidence. It concluded that the prosecution had failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, leading to the acquittal of the accused-appellants.
Issues: The key issues included the age of the prosecutrix, credibility of witness testimonies, reliability of medical examination reports, and the genuineness of the prosecution story.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of collecting evidence, including the age of the prosecutrix, and the need for corroborative evidence in cases of sexual offenses. It highlighted the impact of material improvements in the complaint's statement on the genuineness of the prosecution story.
Final Decision: The court allowed the criminal appeals, set aside the conviction and sentence of the appellants, and acquitted them of all charges.
JITENDRA CHAUHAN,J.
1. Jitender alias Chintu son of Brij Mohan and Chetan Parkash have preferred this appeal against the judgment of conviction and sentenced dated 20.10.2000/21.10.2000. The said appellants were convicted under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of one year each and to pay a fine of `1000/-each under Section 354 IPC or in default of payment of fine to further undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of one month.
2. In criminal appeal No.1053-SB-2000 Manoj Kumar assailed the judgment of his conviction under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentence of seven years Rigorous Imprisonment and pay a fine of `5000/-for the commission of offence punishable under Section 376 IPC or in default of payment of fine to further undergo Simple Imprisonment for three months.
3. It is proposed to disposed of both these appeals by way of single judgment as both arise out of the same judgment dated 20.10.2000/21.10.2000 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jagadhri.
4. Brief facts taken out from the judgment that Bir Singh, complainant, PW-4, father of the prosecutrix made a statement Ex.PB before Sub-Inspector, Dhanna Ram, PW-11 on 3.03.2000 at 6:00 p.m. at Bus Stand, Aurangabad. Wherein he has stated that he does labour work. On that day at about 5:00 p.m. when he came back to his house, his wife Anguri Devi and his daughter Rubi Devi disclosed him that when they had gone to bring fodder from the fields at about 3:00 p.m. The prosecutrix was cutting the fooder then Manoj Kumar and Chintu sons of Brij Mohan and Jitender son of Mangat Ram started teasing the prosecutrix. All the three boys forcibly caught the prosecutrix and tried to push her towards sugarcane fields. Her daughter made a noise on which the labourer from the brick-killn were attracted at the spot including Jagtar Singh, PW-3, they rescued prosecutrix from the accused and all the three accused ran away from the spot. Manoj, Chintu and Jitender teased the prosecutrix with bad intention.
5. After recording statement Ex.PB, Sub-Inspector, Dhanna Ram, PW-11 sent this statement to the Police Station for registration of an FIR upon which ASI, Ramesh Chander, PW-7, recorded the FIR Ex.PG in the Police Station. The special report reached the Judicial Magistrate, Jagadhri on 4.03.2000 at 7:00 p.m.
6. The medical examination of the prosecutrix was conducted by Dr.Neenu Kalra, PW-9 on 4.03.2000 at 3:15 p.m.
7. Dr. Neenu Kalra, PW-9 on medical examination opined that possibility of inter course with the prosecutrix cannot be ruled out. The offence was converted to Section 376 IPC. Sub-Inspector, Dhanna Ram, PW-11 completed the investigation and submitted report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. against the accused.
8. The learned Judicial, Ist Class committed the case to the Court of Session vide order dated 12.06.2000 for trial. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jagadhri framed charge against all the three accused under Section 356 IPC read with Section 34 IPC. A charge under Section 376 IPC was framed against Manoj Kumar accused.
9. To prove its case the prosecution examined 12 witnesses. PW-1, H.C. Rishipal and PW-6, Constable, Surender Kumar tendered their respective affidavits Ex.PA and Ex.PF respectively. ASI, Ramesh Chander, PW-7, proved the recording of FIR. Raj Kumar, Patwari, PW-8 proved the scaled plan Ex.PH, which he prepared at police request Ex.PH/1 Constable Raghubir Singh, PW-10, as a witness to recovery memo PJ and Ex.PK. Head Constable Subhash Chand, PW-12 proved the sending of special report to the Judicial Magistrate.
10. The prosecutrix while appearing as PW-2 deposed that accused Manoj took her to the sugar cane field forcibly and committed rape upon her. The other two accused remained standing outside the field. After rescuing herself from the accused Manoj, she came out of the sugar cane field and remaining accused Chinu and Chetan caught her. She raised alaram and
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.