LAWS(P&H)-1997-1-209

SATBIR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

Decided On January 10, 1997
SATBIR Appellant
V/S
STATE OF HARYANA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated February 11, 1987 and February 16, 1987 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Narnaul, by which Satbir appellant, has been convicted under Section 376, Indian Penal Code, and sentences to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/ - and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months.

(2.) BRIEFLY , stated, the case of the prosecution is that on February 15, 1986, at about 10.00 A.M., Suman, daughter of Ram Jiwan, aged about 13 years (hereinafter referred to as 'the prosecutrix'), when asked by her mother Misro to call her brother Dilbagh, who had gone to see one of his friends at the tubewell in the area of nearby village Nimoth, proceeded from her house located at their tubewell. After covering a distance of about three Killas, the prosecutrix paused for a while and called out the name of her brother. Just then, the accused, who was sitting on a Janti tree at that place, surprised her by saying that her brother Dilbagh was with him. When the prosecutrix did not find her brother at or near that place, she walked ahead towards the side of her tubewell. Soon thereafter, the accused jumped down from the Janti tree, took the prosecutrix firmly into his clasp, dragged her to a nearby field and forcibly committed sexual intercourse with her, whereupon she became unconscious owing to severe pain and suffering. On regaining consciousness after about half an hour, she saw the accused and his uncle Hari Ram standing near the place of occurrence. The uncle of the accused advised her to wear her salwar and not to disclose about the act of rape to any person in the village. However, after her return to her house, she narrated the incident to her mother, who immediately informed the matter to her husband Ram Jiwan who was working in the fields. Thereafter, she was taken by her father to Maru Ram, Sarpanch and he too was informed of the whole incident. Maru Ram, Sarpanch also visited the place of occurrence to verify the incident, whereafter he convened a meeting of the respectables of the village and the Panchayat passed a resolution that the accused be imposed a penalty of Rs. 51/ - and also paraded around the village after painting his face black. The decision taken by the panchayat was also reduced into writing, to which the father and the uncle of the accused had consented. Since the decision was not implemented due to the fact that the accused had left the village for the place of his posting in the Army, the matter was reported to the S.H.O. of Police Station, Kanina by the prosecutrix on February 22, 1986 at 6.15 P.M. and that led to the registration of this case.

(3.) THE prosecution, to prove its case, examined P.W. 1 Lady Dr. Amrawati, Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Mahendragarh; P.W.2 Dr. M.P. Labmoria, Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Mahendragrah; P.W.3 Dr. Vinay Chaudhary, Radiologist, Civil Hospital, Narnaul; P.W.4 Suman, prosecutrix; P.W.5 Smt. Misro, mother of the prosecutrix; P.W.6 Ram Jiwan, father of the prosecutrix; P.W.7 Maru Ram, Sarpanch of village Manpura; P.W.8 Shiv Dayal, Teacher, Government Primary School, Manpura; P.W.9 Anoop Singh, Teacher, Government High School, Bhojawas; P.W.10 Rattan Singh; P.W.11 Lekh Ram; P.W.12 Sub Inspector Dilawar Singh, the Investigating Officer and P.W. 13 ASI Azad Singh.