- (1.) M. C. Jain, J. The State is in appeal against the order of acquittal dated 23-1-1998 passed by Sri S. K. Pandey, the then Sessions Judge, Hamirpur in ST No. 230 of 1993, acquitting the accused respondent Ram Asarey of the charge of Section 376 IPC.
(2.) THE relevant facts may be related. THE incident took place on 7-2-1993 at about 5. 00 p. m. in a field situated within the territory of village Dhanauri, Police Station Rath, District Hamirpur. THE victim was Ramshri who herself lodged the FIR at 10. 45 p. m. at the concerned police station by oral narration. THE distance of the police station from the place of occurrence was about 12 kms. At the relevant time, she was returning from the fields with the load of cattle fodder. When she reached near Jwar/arhar field of Laxmi, the accused respondent Ram Asarey emerged therefrom, caught hold of her and forcibly took her to the field. Her efforts to rescue herself from his clutches resulted in vain. He downed her in the field and committed rape on her. While doing so, he also caused bite injuries on her face and scratches with his nails on the other parts of her body. Her shouts attracted Jai Pal Singh PW 2 and Mangi PW 3. Seeing them approaching, the accused respondent ran away. When she reached home, her husband was not there. At his arrival she narrated the incident to him and then went with him to lodge the FIR. On the lodging of the FIR a case was registered and investigation followed at the hands of the S. I. R. P. Tiwari PW 5. She was medically examined on 8-2-1993 at 1. 30 a. m. in Government Female Hospital, Rath by Dr. Sandhya Gupta PW 4. There were multiple scratch marks in an area of 3 x 4 cm over the right lower end of her wrist (lower end of radius) and on left hand in an area of 1-1/2 x 1 cm on the head of radius. Besides, there was teeth bite over left side of her face, 3 cm above middle point of mandible. The vagina admitted two fingers easily. No injury was found on her private parts. Vaginal smear was taken and sent for examination. She was also sent for X-ray for the determination of her age. It was Dr. S. R. Gupta PW 6 who had taken her X-ray. On the basis of the same, her age was found to be over 19 years.
(3.) PETTICOAT that she was putting on at the time of the incident was taken into possession and sealed by the Investigating Officer. Thereafter, it was sent for chemical examination. The investigation resulted in submission of charge sheet against accused respondent. The defence was of denial. According to the accused respondent, he was not present in the village on 7-2- 1993. Instead, he was in Rath and selling chillies. At the trial, the prosecutrix Ramshri PW 1 supported the prosecution case, but Jai Pal Singh PW 2 and Mangi PW 3 who had allegedly reached the spot and seen the accused respondent running away, turned hostile. The chemical examination report was also to the effect that petticoat contained sperms and human semen. The trial Court, however, recorded acquittal observing that the independent witnesses had turned hostile, that injuries sustained by the victim were superficial, that no load of cattle fodder was found at the spot by the Investigating Officer, that she could not even state the area and boundaries of the field in which the incident took place. It was also relied upon as a ground to discard her testimony that according to her the incident had taken place in the field of Laxmi whereas Investigating Officer had found it to be the field of one Ramesh. He also made reference to this aspect of the matter that earlier she was married to one Jasraj and during his lifetime, she married with Man Singh and gave birth to two sons. He also alluded to the defence suggestion (denied by her) that Man Singh had also deserted her and she was at the relevant time living with one Ram Bharosey. The indication probably was that she was a lady of loose character leading an immoral life. Basing on these factors he acquitted the accused respondent.;