JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) The instant appeal has been filed against the order passed by
the Additional Sessions Judge, Narnaul in Sessions Case No.14 of 2002
decided on 23.2.2005. By the impugned judgment, the accused appellants
Gopi, Ajay, Rajesh and Vicky alias Vikrant have been held guilty and
convicted for having committed rape upon Rajni and thereafter having
committed her murder by intentionally causing her death under section 302
and section 376(2)(g) read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. By a
separate order dated 26.2.2005, all the accused were sentenced to undergo
imprisonment for life for the offence punishable under section 302 read with
section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Additionally, all the accused were
sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence under section
376 (2)(g) read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It was also
ordered that the sentences awarded to the accused/appellants would run
concurrently.
(2.) Appeal bearing No.494-DB of 2005 has been filed by the
accused/appellants Gopi, Ajay and Rajesh and Criminal Appeal No.585-DB
of 2005 has been filed by the accused/appellant Vicky through jail. As
both the appeals have arisen out of one and the same order passed by the
Additional Sessions Judge, we shall dispose of the same collectively
through the instant order.
(3.) The prosecution version of the incident is based on the
complaint made by Gurbachan Singh PW6 father of Rajni to ASI Kailash
Chand PW1 on 22.3.2002 at 11.30 A.M. wherein he stated that he has two
daughters namely Rajni aged 14/15 years and Neetu aged 10 years. As per
the complainant Gurbachan Singh PW6, his wife Nirmala died about five
years ago. In his complaint Gurbachan Singh PW6 stated that on the night
of 21.3.2002, he had gone to sleep after taking his meals at about 10:00
P.M. His two daughters Rajni and Neetu along with the daughter of his
brother (Leela Ram PW11) Veena, along with the mother of the
complainant Lakshmi, were all sleeping together in one room. It was
asserted by Gurbachan Singh PW6 that his mother woke up at about 1.30
A.M. in order to urinate. Having woken up, she found that the outer door of
the house was open. Through the window she saw a man going on the
street. Accordingly the complainant's mother Lakshmi, woke up the
complainant Gurbachan Singh PW6, as well as the complainant's brother
Leela Ram PW11, and informed them that the outer door of the house was
open, and that, she has seen a man going on the street. Thereupon, the
complainant Gurbachan Singh PW6, as well as, his brother Leela Ram
PW11 went out into the street but found no one there. They accordingly
returned to the house. After some time the younger daughter of the
complainant Gurbachan Singh PW6 i.e. Neetu told the complainant as also
his brother Leela Ram PW11, that Rajni was not lying on her bed. Finding
Rajni missing, the complainant Gurbachan Singh PW6 called his relatives,
and went out to search for his daughter Rajni. He claims to have searched
for her in all nooks and corners of the city, including the bus stand, railway
station, and the canal, but could not find her anywhere. Some student of
Vidya Niketan High School told the searching party, that the body of a girl
was lying in the street leading to Moti School. On receiving the aforesaid
information, the complainant Gurbachan Singh PW6 along with his brother
Leela Ram PW11, went to the said street and found the dead body of his
daughter Rajni. The "salwar" of his daughter Rajni had been tied and
wrapped around her neck. Her private parts had been eaten by some
animal. On the question of suspicion on any particular individual having
abducted and murdered his daughter, and thereafter having thrown her on
the street is concerned, the complainant Gurbachan Singh PW6 asserted
that he had no enmity with anybody, nor did he suspect anyone. On the
basis of the aforesaid complaint, a First Information Report bearing No.84
was registered at Police Station Mahendergarh on 23.2.2002 at 11.40 A.M.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.