BHARAT BHUSHAN PARSOON, J. - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against judgment of conviction and order of sentence, both dated 30.8.2003 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtak, vide which accused -appellant Karan Singh(hereinafter referred to as accused) was held guilty in a complaint case committed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtak vide order dated 6.5.2003 for commission of an offence punishable under Section 376 read with Section 511 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter mentioned as IPC) and was sentenced as under: Offence Sentence In default Under Section 376 RI for four years and fine RI for one year. read with Section 511 of Rs.5,000/ - IPC It was also ordered that in case of realisation of amount of fine, a sum of Rs.4,500/ - shall be given to the prosecutrix after the decision of appeal or after the expiry of the period of limitation thereof, as the case may be.
(2.) THE prosecution version briefly put is as under: - On 26.9.1998 Smt. Rajbala (complainant) along with Smt. Bimla, her nanand (sister -in -law) had gone to provide fodder to their cattle heads in their gher. Complainant Smt. Rajbala had proceeded to answer the call of nature in the nearby Keekar grove. Smt. Bimla had accompanied her. She was little ahead of her bhabhi. Accused Karan Singh had been following Smt. Rajbala. Finding her alone, he caught hold of her. He pounced upon her and gagged her mouth with his hands. He started pressing her breasts and giving a push threw her on the ground. Acting fast, he loosened the string of her salwar and ventured to violate her person by sexual intercourse with her. He could not complete the task as the victim had raised hue and cry for help, attracting Smt.Bimla and yet another lady Smt. Bala wife of Ramesh, on the spot. Accused then took to his heels. Matter was reported to the police but when no action was taken, criminal complaint was filed by Smt. Rajbala. After consideration of preliminary evidence led by the complainant, the accused was summoned to face his trial for commission of the offence punishable under Section 376 read with Section 511 IPC. Turning down plea of the accused that no offence under Section 376 read with Section 511 IPC was made out and further that only offence triable against him on the allegations of the complaint was under Section 354 IPC, the case of the accused was committed to the Court of Sessions vide order of 6.5.2003 of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtak. The accused thus faced trial for commission of the offence punishable under Section 376 read with Section 511, as per charge framed against him on 2.6.2003 by the trial Court. To substantiate its case, the prosecution had examined HC Har Gian (PW1), who proved FIR No.330 which was registered against the accused for commission of the offences punishable under Sections 354, 452, 323 and 506 IPC with regard to earlier incident of 27.5.1998. Smt. Rajbala(victim) was examined as PW2, Smt. Bimla(eye -witness) entered the witness -box as PW3. PW4 HC Bhup Singh proved daily diary report (Ex.PC) of 26.9.1998 stating further that accused Karan Singh on complaint of Smt. Rajbala was arrested under Sections 107 and 151 Cr.P.C. as well.
(3.) THOUGH the accused in his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C., wherein incriminating material having come in prosecution evidence was put to him, had taken up a stand that he was having physical relations with Smt. Rajbala for the last three years but when such fact became public and her husband and devar had come to know of it, under their pressure she got the case registered against him and had also filed complaint (Ex.PB) even further. The learned trial Court rejected this version and finding the prosecution case to have been proved against the accused, holding him guilty, convicted and sentenced him thereafter.;