SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(P&H) 294

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
R.L. Anand and Virender Singh, JJ.
Sunil - Appellant
Versus
The State of Haryana - Respondent
Crl. Appeal No. 247-DB of 2002.
Decided On : 17 February, 2003

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. S.S. Behl, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Sanjay Vashisth, DAG, Haryana.

The importance of the prosecutrix's testimony and the presumption of lack of consent in cases of sexual assault.

Headnote:

Rape - Minor - Indian Penal Code Sections 363, 366, 376 - The court convicted the appellant under Sections 363, 366, and 376 of the Indian Penal Code for kidnapping, inducing for illicit intercourse, and rape of a minor girl. The court found the prosecutrix to be less than 16 years of age based on documentary and oral evidence. The court relied on the prosecutrix's statement, medical observations, and school records to establish her age. The court emphasized the importance of the prosecutrix's testimony and the presumption of lack of consent in cases of sexual assault. The court rejected the appellant's plea of innocence and upheld the conviction and sentences, with a modified sentence of 7 years for the offense of rape.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant was convicted for kidnapping, inducing for illicit intercourse, and rape of a minor girl. The prosecutrix, less than 16 years of age, was found in the company of the appellant at Hisar. The court relied on the prosecutrix's statement, medical observations, and school records to establish her age. The court emphasized the importance of the prosecutrix's testimony and the presumption of lack of consent in cases of sexual assault. The court rejected the appellant's plea of innocence and upheld the conviction and sentences, with a modified sentence of 7 years for the offense of rape.

Finding of the Court:

The court found the appellant guilty of kidnapping, inducing for illicit intercourse, and rape of a minor girl. The court established the prosecutrix's age to be less than 16 years based on documentary and oral evidence. The court emphasized the importance of the prosecutrix's testimony and the presumption of lack of consent in cases of sexual assault. The court rejected the appellant's plea of innocence and upheld the conviction and sentences, with a modified sentence of 7 years for the offense of rape.

Issues: The issues revolved around the age of the prosecutrix, the appellant's guilt in kidnapping, inducing for illicit intercourse, and rape of a minor girl, and the plea of innocence by the appellant.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the prosecutrix's statement, medical observations, and school records to establish her age. The court emphasized the importance of the prosecutrix's testimony and the presumption of lack of consent in cases of sexual assault. The court rejected the appellant's plea of innocence and upheld the conviction and sentences, with a modified sentence of 7 years for the offense of rape.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction and sentences, with a modified sentence of 7 years for the offense of rape.


JUDGMENT

R.L. Anand, J. - Shri Sunil son of Shri Lakhmi Chand, has filed the present criminal appeal and it has been directed against the judgment dated 19.1.2002 and order dated 22.1.2002, passed by the Court of Additional Session Judge, Bhiwani who convicted the appellant under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- under Section 376 Indian Penal Code. In default of payment of fine he was directed to undergo R.I. for two months. The appellant was sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of 4 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- under Section 363 Indian Penal Code. In default of payment of fine he was directed to undergo R.I. for two months. He was further sentenced to undergo six years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- under Section 366 Indian Penal Code. In default of payment of fine he was ordered to undergo further R.I. two months. The learned trial Court also gave the direction that all the sentences imposed upon the appellant shall run concurrently.

2. The appellant Shri Sunil, was charge-sheeted under Sections 363/366/376 Indian Penal Code on the allegations that on 23.4.1997, in the area of Siwani, he kidnapped Ms. Shanti alias Sunder, a minor female under the age of 18 years from the lawful guardianship of her father Shri Hira Ram and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 363 Indian Penal Code. The second charge against the appellant was that he allegedly induced Ms. Shanti alias Sunder, the minor girl, with such intention that she may be forced to illicit intercourse and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 366 Indian Penal Code. The third charge against the accused-appellant was that he allegedly committed rape upon Shanti alias Sunder, a minor girl, without her will or consent and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 376 Indian Penal Code.

3. The F.I.R. in this case was lodged by Shri Hira Ram, deceased, father of the prosecutrix who made statement before S.I./SHO, Police-Station, Siwani when the Investigating Officer along with policy-party, was patrolling and was checking the crimes near the B.D.O. Block, Siwani. The complaint Shri Hira Ram met the Investigating Officer and made a statement to the effect that he was a resident of Ward No. 12, Siwani town and does the work of taking contract of dead cattle at Siwani. He had 7 daughters and 3 sons. Out of them, Maya is the eldest daughter and then Jamna and thereafter, Munni, then Chhotti Bai, then Om Parkash and thereafter Ram Bhateri. Jagdish is younger to Bhateri. Krishna is younger to Jagdish. After the birth of Krishna, Ram Chander was born and the youngest child in the family is Sunder prosecutrix. He further stated that his six elder daughters and two elder sons are married. Ram Chander younger son was aged about 16/17 years and Ms Sunder younger daughter was about 14/14-1/2 years and she was unmarried. He further stated that all the married daughters usually visit his house. His sons and other members of the family are residing in one house jointly. During the days of occurrence, due to the harvesting season he and his wife Darka, his sons Om Parkash and Jagdish Chander and grand-daughter had gone to village Talwandi Rana Police-Station, Sadar, Hisar from 21.4.1997 for harvesting crops. His younger daughter Sunder, the wife of his elder son Om Parkash, namely Parwati and wife of Jagdish namely Krishna were left in the house to look after the same. Yesterday i.e. on 23.4.1997 at about 3/4 P.M. he along with family members, was working in the field at village Talwandi Rana when Bijinder Singh son of Asa Ram, resident of Siwani, who is friend of his son Jagdish and treats him like brother, had informed that his daughter Sunder had been missing since morning. On receipt of this information, he along with other members of the family reached the house at Siwani. On inquiring Parwati wife of Om Parkash and Krishna wife of Jagdish told h
















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top