HARISH SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a criminal appeal and has been directed against the judgment dated 11.1.1997 and order dated 13.1.1997 passed by the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Jagadhri who convicted the appellant Harish Singh under section 376 I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-. In default of payment of fine, he was further directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case can be noticed in the following manner :- Kumari Parvati (prosecutrix) is a daughter of Vaman and originally she hailed from Bihar. She lost her parents. Se started living in Balkunj Chhachhrauli. On account of poverty, she had been begging earlier. She was found begging at Faridabad in trains. She was brought to the office of the Deputy Commissioner, Faridabad who ordered that Kumari Parvati be kept in a rescue home i.e. Balkunj at Chhachhraui. The story of the prosecution goes that on 18.9.1995 at about 4.00 P.M. the prosecutrix was present in her cottage at Balkunj. Appellant Harish Singh during those days of the occurrence used to work as cook with that institution. He came to the prosecutrix by saying to prepare tea for him. At that time the other children were playing in the dining room. Kumari Parvati was not inclined to prepare tea for the appellant but upon his insistence she agreed. As a result Kumari Parvati prosecutrix went to other room of the institution in order to take sugar and tea leaves. When she was taking sugar and tea leaves from almirah, the appellant entered that room and bolted the room from inside. Appellant then forcibly took the prosecutrix to a bed and made her to fall. He opened the string of her salwar, took it off and open his pant and thereafter he committed rape upon the prosecutrix. When prosecutrix tried to raise alarm she was threatened that in case she raised noise she will be disgraced. The appellant also threatened the prosecutrix that she would be beaten if she raised alarm. On account of shame and fear the prosecutrix did not narrate the occurrence to anybody till 21.9. 1995 when this occurrence was narrated for the first time to Poonam who was other inmate of Balkunj. Poonam then told the alleged occurrence to Ahilya who brought the matter to the notice of Incharge of the Institution namely Kamlesh Girdhar. Thereafter matter was reported to the police who recorded statement of Parvati. Parvati was got medically examined and she was also got radiologically examined for determination of her age. S.I. Piare Lal who recorded statement of the prosecutrix took up investigation of this case. He came to Balkunj and took into possession salwar of the prosecutrix and bed- sheet of the bed. He also prepared rough site plan of the occurrence. The appellant was arrested on 22.9.1995 and he was medically examined as to whether he was fit to perform sexual intercourse or not. His underwear was taken into possession and sealed parcel was prepared. The statement of the prosecutrix Parvati was recorded by the Chief Judicial Magistrate on 28.9.1995 under section 164 Cr.P.C. The sealed parcel was sent to the office of the Chemical Examiner who gave his report Ex.PO. On completion of the investigation of the case, the appellant was challaned under section 376 I.P.C. in the court of Area Magistrate who supplied copies of the documents to the accused and vide order 24.11.1995 committed the accused to the court of Sessions.

(3.) IN order to prove the charge, the prosecution examined Kumari Parvati prosecutrix PW.1, Sanyogita Puri (PW.2), Karan Singh Head Constable as PW.3, Doctor Prem Chand Medical Officer who conducted ossification test of the prosecutrix as PW.4, Dr. V.K. Wadhwan as PW.5, Doctor Asha Wadhwan who medically examined prosecutrix as PW.6, Constable Ram Kumar as PW.7, Pardeep Singh Inspector who prepared final report under section 173 Cr.P.C. as PW.10 and the Investigating Officer S.I. Piare Lal as PW.11. The prosecution tendered in evidence the affidavits of the formal witnesses and also report of the Chemical Examiner. Kumari Poonam and Kamlesh were given up by the prosecution during trial as unnecessary.