STATE OF H.P. Vs. SURAJ SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) - State has appealed against the Sessions Court judgment, whereby the respondents, who were tried for an offence under Section 376 read with Section 34 I.P.C., have been acquitted.

(2.) The prosecutrix, who was examined as PW1 at the trial, was married to one Bhagal Ram. In the year 1991, she was twenty one years of age. On 8.3.1991, she went to village Jhiri to see her fathers sister (Bua). She started back for her mothers place in village Palsehar the same evening around 5.00 p.m. on the way, she purchased certain items of grocery at the shop of Govind Ram (PW12). When, after leaving the shop of said Govind Ram, she reached a place called Janjholi Nullah, respondents Suraj Singh and Nefru met her. Suraj Singh respondent physically lifted her and carried her to the near by nullah. There she was raped by Suraj Singh and his companion Netru. After about half an hour, the other two respondents also reached there. They too had sexual intercourse with her. When the prosecutrix tried to raise alarm, she was gagged by her own Dupatta, Kayla Devi (PW5) happened to reach the Nullah. She was carrying a Jogti (a handful bundle of burning sticks which is used as torch). Then said Kayla Devi went to the house of the mother of the prosecutrix in village Parsehar. Mother of the prosecutrix sent her son Nathu (PW11) and her husbands brother Narainu (PW10) to the Nullah. Prosecutrix met these two persons on the way. She did not narrate the incident to either of the two. On the next morning, she narrated the incident to her mother Kesri Devi (PW4). Thereafter, she went to Police Station, Aut and lodged the F.I.R. Exhibit -PA.

(3.) Prosecutrix was medically examined by Dr. M. Lata (PW2) who did not find any injury on her person. She noticed that the prosecutrix was used to sexual intercourse.