D.P. Gupta, J. - (1.) This appeal has been preferred by Sahab Singh alias Khadar Singh, Kundan Singh and Kulwant Singh against the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ganganagar convicting the three appellants under Sections 366, 368 and 376 IPC. and sentencing them to three years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 50/- each and in default of payment of fine to undergo further one month's rigorous imprisonment, for each of the offences under Sections 366 and 368 IPC and four years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 100/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two months for the offence under section 376 IPC. The substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
(2.) Briefly stated the prosecution case is that Smt. Balwant Kaur wife of Kaka Singh was picking cotton on November 27, 1973 in Murraba No. 48 in Chak 3/L in village Matilirathan. She was alone in her field as her husband had gone away to Kesharisinghpur to sell cotton. Ajmer Singh, brother of her husband, was also picking cotton in the adjoining field. It is alleged that at about 3 P. M. the three appellants Sahab Singh, Kundan Singh and Kulwant Singh went to the field where Smt. Balwant Kaur was picking cotton and Kulwant Singh gave a blow on her head with a 'danda' and thereafter all the three persons carried her away near Phusewala Canal and there all the three persons committed rape forcibly upon her by turn. It has been further alleged that while the three persons were trying to carry away Smt. Balwant Kaur, her brother-in-law Ajmer Singh and Gurdayal Singh, who were also present in the nearby field situated in Murraba No. 46, had come to the place of occurrence, on hearing the cries of the lady and objected to the three appellants carrying her way, but the appellants did not listen to them. It has further been alleged that the three appellants kept Smt. Balwant Kaur near the canal during that night and in the next morning they carried her to their house situated in 18 F, at a distance of about two Murrabas, where she remained with the ladies of the family of the appellants on Wednesday i.e. November 28, 1973. On Thursday the appellants again took her near the Phusewala canal and there Khadar Singh brought some liquor and all the three having taken excessive liquor lost their senses. Smt. Balwant Kaur then got an opportunity to run away as she saw a bus going on the read nearby. She made a sign to stop the bus and having entered the same, the reached Karanpur bus-stand at Ganganagar where Gurdayal Singh Sarpanch, Jugraj Singh and the husband of Smt. Balwant Kaur alongwith the Police Inspector met her and she narrated the entire episode to them. She was then taken to the Government hospital and there she was medically examined. On the return of Kaka Singh next morning, Ajmer Singh told him that the three appellants had forcibly carried away Smt. Balwant Kaur and thereafter Kaka Singh lodged the First Information Report at about 9-00 a.m. on November 28, 1973 at the Police station, Matilirathan. The appellants were reported to be absconding and they were eventually arrested on December 9, 1973. After usual investigation, the police produced a challan before the Magistrate First Class Karanpur, who committed the appellants to stand their trial before the Additional Sessions Judge, Ganganagar. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ganganagar framed charges against the appellants under Sections 366, 368 and 376 IPC to which they pleaded not guilty and after a trial the appellants were convicted and sentenced as mentioned above.
(3.) In the present appeal, learned counsel for the appellants firstly contended that the First Information Report was lodged after a considerable delay, in as much as the incident of abduction is alleged to have taken place at about 3-00 p.m. on November 27, 1973 while the report was lodged at the police station, which is situated in the very village in which Smt. Balwant Kaur was residing at about 9-00 a.m. on the next day. It was contended that Gurdayal Singh and Ajmer Singh, who are alleged to be eye-witnesses, could have made the First Information Report much earlier but their failure to do so throws considerable doubt in respect of their testimony. The next contention of the learned counsel was that there are several improbabilities in the prosecution story and considering all of them the said story should not be accepted as it was highly unreasonable and improbable as it was not possible for the appellants to take away Smt, Balwant Kaur in broad day light when several people were working in the nearby fields, including her brother-in-law. Then the learned counsel for the appellants further submitted that Smt. Balwant Kaur was a lady of easy virtues and she is the solitary witness so far as the question of rape was concerned and in view of her antecedents and character, the prosecution story should not be believed. Lastly, it was argued by the learned counsel for the appellants that the sentence awarded to the appellants was excessive.;