Punjab-Haryana High Court
Basti Ram & Anr vs State Of Haryana on 24 July, 2013
Author: Naresh Kumar Sanghi
Bench: Naresh Kumar Sanghi
Criminal Appeal No.162-SB-1992 (O&M) ..1..
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Appeal No.162-SB-1992(O&M)
Date of Decision : 24th July, 2013
Basti Ram & Anr.
...Appellants
Versus
State of Haryana
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI
Present: Mr.R.S.Bajaj, Advocate,
for the appellants.
Mr.Anupam Sharma, AAG, Haryana.
***
Naresh Kumar Sanghi, J.
Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of conviction dated 01.04.1992 and the order of sentence dated 03.04.1992 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sonepat, whereby appellant No.1-Basti Ram and appellant No.2- Satish Parkash were held guilty for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(g), 366, 342 and 506, IPC, and ordered to undergo the following sentences:-
Offences Sentence (in R.I.) Fine (in `) In default (in R.I.) 342, IPC Six months -- --
366, IPC Five years 1000/- Six months 376(2)(g), IPC Ten years 2000/- One year 506, IPC One year -- --
All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. After filing of the present appeal, appellant No.2- Satish Parkash has died as per the statement suffered by the Sharma Seema 2013.08.16 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Criminal Appeal No.162-SB-1992 (O&M) ..2.. learned counsel for the appellants and as such, the present appeal qua him abates.
Learned counsel for the State has not controverted the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellants with regard to death of appellant No.2-Satish Parkash.
Therefore, present appeal abates qua petitioner No.2, Satish Parkash.
Brief facts of the case are that on 12.03.1990 at about 6.00 p.m., ASI Mehar Singh (PW1) of Police Station, Kharkhoda, along with one more police official was present at the bus stop of village Farmana. Sardara Singh (PW3) of village Farmana presented an application (Ex.PC) before him alleging that his grand-daughter (daughter's daughter i.e. Dohati), the prosecutrix aged about 14-15 years, was residing at his house in village Farmana and was a student of 09th standard in the school of village Bhainswal. On 27.02.1990 at about 8.00 p.m, the prosecutrix had gone out of his house for answering the call of nature but did not return back and despite search, she could not be traced. The suspicion was raised on one Mohinder, son of Rupa, r/o Nizampur Majra, a medical practitioner in village Bhainswal and Satte, s/o Ram Narain, r/o village Farmana, who was running a chemist shop at bus stand of village Farmana.
After making his endorsement, ASI Mehar Lal (PW-1) sent the said application to Police Station, Kharkoda, through Constable Balbir Singh for registration of the case, on the basis of which formal FIR (Ex.PG) was recorded by Sube Singh (PW-7). ASI Mehar Singh Sharma Seema 2013.08.16 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Criminal Appeal No.162-SB-1992 (O&M) ..3..
(PW-1) visited the house of complainant (Sardara) and recorded the statements of few witnesses in terms of Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code (for brevity "Cr.P.C."). During investigation, ASI Jaidev Singh arrested Mohinder s/o Rupa, r/o village Nizampur Majra, on suspicion, in terms of Section 41(1), Cr.P.C., who disclosed to ASI Jaidev Singh that on 27.02.1990, he (Mohinder) and Satte took the prosecutrix with them. Mohinder further stated that he left the prosecutrix with Satte at Inter State Bus Terminus, Delhi, with direction to him to sell the girl to somebody with the understanding that the sale proceeds would be equally shared by them. Satte took the prosecutrix to Bareilly and sold her to one Jamalu Din of Bareilly, from where the prosecutrix could be recovered. During the police remand of Mohinder, the disclosure statement suffered by him was found false by the Investigating Agency.
On 06.04.1990, ASI Jaidev Singh (PW-22) traced out the prosecutrix and her father. On the next day, i.e. 07.04.1990, the prosecutrix was produced before the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Sonepat, where she suffered her statement, in terms of Section 164, Cr.P.C., narration of which reads as under:-
"Stated that her age was 15 years. She had studied up to 8th standard at University Campus since her father was employed there. Her maternal uncle, Satish Parkash, brought her to village Farmana for further education. In the month of June, he got her Sharma Seema 2013.08.16 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Criminal Appeal No.162-SB-1992 (O&M) ..4..
admitted in 9th class at village Bhainswal. Her maternal uncle was employed in veterinary hospital at Bhainswal. Daily, she used to go to village Bhainswal from village Farmana with her maternal uncle. For few days, her maternal uncle behaved properly with her but in the month of August, he started teasing her. In spite of her resistance, he continued his misdeeds. She narrated the entire incident to her maternal grand-mother and aunt but they did not pay any heed. In the day time, her maternal grand-mother used to go to the fields while her maternal Aunt had gone to her parents house to deliver a child. In the month of September, her maternal uncle (mama) Satish Parkash committed rape on her against her wishes. Due to hesitation, she could not narrate the facts to her parents, on their visit to village Farmana from Nainital. Satish Parkash threatened her that if she narrated anything in that regard then she would be eliminated. Her maternal uncle committed rape on her for 12-15 times. When she started vomiting then her maternal uncle brought medicines from Dr. Mohinder of village Farmana Majra and gave to her. Thereafter, her maternal uncle was transferred to Panipat but occasionally he used to visit village Farmana and live at the house of her grand-mother. In the month of October, Basti Ram was transferred in place of her Sharma Seema 2013.08.16 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Criminal Appeal No.162-SB-1992 (O&M) ..5..
maternal uncle and started residing in the neighbourhood of house of her maternal uncle. He used to carry her to village Bhainswal daily. One day, he took her to veterinary hospital instead of school. At that time, no one was present there and he committed rape on her in spite of her resistance. She told him to leave her at her house but he did not agree. On 27.02.90, Satish Parkash and Basti Ram took her from the house of her grand-mother on the pretext that they would leave her at her parental house. At about 7.45 p.m, they brought her to veterinary hospital at village Bhainswal and left her all alone in the room and went away. She remained there up to 08th March. In the night, they used to come there. On 08.03.1990, both of them brought her to bus stand, at Delhi, where two persons met them, who were going to Nainital. Satish Parkash and Basti Ram sent her with the said two persons. On the next day, they left her in her neighbourhood at Nainital and went away. From 09.03.1990 to 20.03.1990, she remained at the house of her neighbour, who called the society people on 21.03.1990 and got her house unlocked and sent her there. Till the arrival of her father at Nainital, i.e.
04.04.1990, she remained in her house and on 06.04.1990, she alongwith her father came to Madipur. Thereafter, she came to Police Station, Sharma Seema 2013.08.16 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Criminal Appeal No.162-SB-1992 (O&M) ..6..
Kharkhoda."
After arrest of the appellants and completion of investigation, charge-sheet (report under Section 173, Cr.P.C.) was presented before the learned Area Judicial Magistrate and the case was committed to the Court of Session which was assigned to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sonepat, for trial.
Basti Ram and Satish Parkash were charge-sheeted for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 342, 363, 366, 376 and 506, IPC to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
The prosecution, in order to substantiate the charges, examined the following witnesses:-
PW-1:- Dr.Nandini Shah, a private practitioner, deposed that on 07.04.1990 at about 12.15 p.m., the prosecutrix aged about 14 years and 09 months, a student of 09th class, was brought by ASI Jai dev. It was further deposed that she had medico-legally examined the prosecutrix. The vaginal swabs were drawn, preserved and handed over to the Investigating Officer. The clothes of the prosecutrix were also taken into possession and the sealed parcels containing salwar (Ex.P-3) and underwear (Ex.P-4) were also handed over to the police.
PW-2:-Dr.R.N.Tehlan, Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Sonepat, deposed that on 22.04.1990, he medico-legally examined Basti Ram (appellant No.1) aged 32 years, male, brought by ASI Satvir Singh. As per the opinion of the doctor, Sharma Seema 2013.08.16 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Criminal Appeal No.162-SB-1992 (O&M) ..7.. there was nothing to suggest that he was incapable of doing sexual intercourse.
PW-3:- Sardara, deposed that about 1-1/2 years ago, the prosecutrix was brought to him by her father, who asked him to get her admitted in some school so that she might get further education. It was further deposed that his nephew Satish Kumar, who was employed in Veterinary Hospital, got her admitted in a school at village Bhainswal. She used to go to school and there she developed intimacy with Mohinder Brahman. Sat Narain and Mohinder told him (PW3) that they had sold the prosecutrix in Aligarh and she could not be traced out. He also deposed with regard to lodging of report (Ex.PC) to the police.
PW-4:- Krishna Devi, a teacher from Govt. Girls High School, Bhainswal, as per record pertaining to prosecutrix, deposed that the date of birth of the prosecutrix was 27.06.1975 and to that effect, the certificate (Ex.PD) was also issued by her.
PW-5:- Dr.S.S.Wadhwa, Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Sonepat, deposed that on 05.05.1990, he medico-legally examined Satish Kumar and found that there was nothing to suggest that he (Satish Kumar) could not perform the sexual intercourse.
PW-6:- Kanwar Singh, Statistical Assistant, Civil Hospital, Sonepat, deposed that the date of birth of Asha Kumari daughter of Sham Singh, resident of village Farmana was 10.06.1974.
PW-7:- ASI Sube Singh deposed that on 12.03.1990, he Sharma Seema 2013.08.16 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Criminal Appeal No.162-SB-1992 (O&M) ..8..
received a complaint of Sardara Singh sent by ASI Mehar Singh, on the basis of which, he recorded formal FIR (Ex.PG). He also deposed that he sent the special report to the learned Area Judicial Magistrate and the Superintendent of Police, Sonepat, through Constable Surinder Singh.
PW-8:- Jagwanti Devi, a lady constable, deposed that on 07.04.1990, she accompanied the prosecutrix from Police Station, Kharkhoda to Civil Hospital, Sonepat, for medical examination. After conducting the medico-legal examination, the lady doctor handed over a sealed parcel which she further handed over to ASI Jaidev vide recovery memo (Ex.PF).
PW-9:- Anil Kumar, Draft man, proved the scaled site plans (Ex.PN and Ex.PO) prepared by him on 24.06.1990.
PW-10:- Dr.V.K.Madan deposed that in February and March 1990, he was posted at Veterinary Hospital, Bhainswal. Basti Ram (appellant No.1) was posted there as Veterinary Live Development Assistant, during the said period. Satish Kumar (appellant No.2) also remained posted as Veterinary Live Development Assistant in the said hospital up to 24.05.1889. The niece of Satish Kumar used to come to Govt. Girls School, Bhainswal, and after his transfer, she was coming on scooter with Basti Ram. The prosecutrix had accompanied the police to the said hospital in his presence and pointed out the place and the bed lying in the quarter, situate in the premises of the hospital.
PW-11:- Constable Satynder Singh deposed that he in the company of Constable Mahender Singh had taken Satish Sharma Seema 2013.08.16 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Criminal Appeal No.162-SB-1992 (O&M) ..9..
Kumar to Civil Hospital, Sonepat, for medical examination. The doctor handed over one sealed parcel bearing impression "S.S.W." and a copy of MLR to him which he further handed over to ASI Satvir Singh vide recovery memo (Ex.PT).
PW-12:- Head Constable Bijender Singh deposed that Satish Kumar accused was arrested on 07.05.1990. On the same day, he was taken to his (Satish Kumar) house at village Farmana. Satish Kumar had pointed out the "Chaubara" and the bed lying there where Hemlata used to sleep in the presence of Partap Singh, Sarpanch. He had also deposed that the memo (Ex.PU) in this regard was prepared.
PW-13:- Head Constable Kartar Singh deposed that on 22.04.1990, ASI Satvir Singh arrested Basti Ram (appellant No.1), who, on interrogation, suffered disclosure statement (Ex.PV) which was signed by him and attested by the witnesses. In pursuance of the disclosure statement, Basti Ram (appellant No.1) got recovered a scooter from the place pointed out by him vide recovery memo (Ex.PW).
PW-14:- Inspector Charan Singh deposed that after completion of the investigation, he had submitted the charge- sheet (report under Section 173, Cr.P.C.) under his signatures on 04.07.1990.
PW-15:- Vijay Kumar, Clerk, Animal Husbandry, Panipat, deposed that Satish Kumar had joined on 08.08.1989 at Panipat office. As per the record, Satish Kumar remained absent from the office from 24.04.1990 onwards.
Sharma Seema 2013.08.16 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Criminal Appeal No.162-SB-1992 (O&M) ..10..
PW-16:- Prosecutrix deposed in consonance with her statement suffered under Section 164, Cr.P.C., and fully supported the prosecution case.
PW-17:- Jaiwanti Devi deposed that the prosecutrix was her daughter. She in her childhood was also known by the name of "A.Kumari" (name concealed) out of love and affection, and that her date of her birth was 27.06.1975. The prosecutrix was sent to her maternal uncle's house in village Farmana for further studies.
PW-18:- Sham Singh deposed that the prosecutrix was his daughter. Her date of birth was 10.06.1974. She used to study in village Farmana in the year 1990. On 20.02.1990, he visited village Farmana but could not contact his daughter. On 01.03.1990, Ram Lal, his brother-in-law, informed him that the prosecutrix was missing and was not available at the house. He visited village Farmana and came to know that the prosecutrix was missing since 27.02.1990. The matter was reported to the police on 12.03.1990 by Sardara (PW-3). On his return to Panth Nagar, he met his daughter who narrated the entire incident to him. He came back to Delhi with his daughter on 06.04.1990, then a police officer visited their house at Madipur in Delhi, who asked him to bring his daughter to the police station as their statements were to be recorded and the prosecutrix was to be medically examined. On 07.04.1990, he brought his daughter to Police Station, Kharkhoda, as directed by the police officer, and she was taken to Civil Hospital, Sonepat, where she was medico- Sharma Seema 2013.08.16 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Criminal Appeal No.162-SB-1992 (O&M) ..11.. legally examined. Her statement was recorded by the police and the Magistrate. The police had recovered one mattress (gadella) in his presence vide recovery memo (Ex.PY).
PW-19:- Ram Singh deposed that Sham Singh was employed as Mechanic in the University at Delhi. In the first week of March, 1990, he had visited his house. On 12.03.1990, the neighbours of Sham Singh informed him that his daughter had come. A telegram was sent to Sham Singh but he did not respond to the same, therefore, he went to Delhi to know the address of Sham Singh and thereafter, he informed Sham Singh that his daughter had reached Nainital with two unknown persons. On his way back to Nanital, the police met him and recorded his statement.
PW-20:- Mrs.Vivek Bharti Sharma, Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, deposed that on 07.4.1990, on an application moved by the police, she recorded the statement of the prosecutrix aged about 15 years, resident of Nainital. Before recording the statement, she had informed that prosecutrix was not bound to make any statement. When statement was recorded, no police official was present. The statement was read over and explained to the prosecutrix and in token of its correctness, she (prosecutrix) signed the statement (Ex.PW20/A). After recording the statement, the same was sealed.
PW-21:- ASI Mehar Singh deposed that on 12.03.1990, he was posted at Police Station, Kharkhoda. On that day, Sardara Singh presented an application (Ex.PC) before him at the bus Sharma Seema 2013.08.16 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Criminal Appeal No.162-SB-1992 (O&M) ..12.. stand of village Farmana and after making endorsement (Ex.PW21/A) sent the same to the Police Station for registration of the case. He further deposed that he went to the house of Sardara and recorded the statements of a few witnesses, in terms of Section 161, Cr.P.C.
PW-22:- ASI Jai Dev Singh deposed that on 19.03.1990, the investigation of the case was handed over to him. On 03.04.1990, he went to Madipur at the house of the prosecutrix where Dharam Singh, her maternal grand-father, and Ram Singh resident of Panth Nagar were joined and their statements were recorded. On 06.04.1990, he again went to Madipur where Sham Singh and the prosecutrix were present. Their statements in terms of Section 161 Cr.P.C were recorded. On 07.04.1990 he got the prosecutrix medico-legally examined at Civil Hospital, Sonepat. Lady Constable Jagwanti handed over to him two sealed parcels containing swabs, salwar and underwear of the prosecutrix and one parcel containing some papers and medico-legal report. On 07.04.1990, he produced the prosecutrix before the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Sonepat, who recorded her statement (Ex.PW20/A).
PW-23:- ASI Satvir Singh deposed that the investigation of the case was handed over to him on 09.04.1990. On 11.04.1990, he obtained the copy of statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164, Cr.P.C. On 17.04.1990, he joined the prosecutrix in the investigation and took her to Veterinary Hospital, Bhainswal. She demarcated the place where Sharma Seema 2013.08.16 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Criminal Appeal No.162-SB-1992 (O&M) ..13.. she was confined and raped. He prepared the site plan (Ex.PW23/A) of the place of occurrence on the demarcation of the prosecutrix. The prosecutrix took him to the house of Satish Kumar and on her demarcation, site plan (Ex.PW23/B) of the room of the house was prepared. The cotton mattress (gadella) was taken into possession vide recovery memo (Ex.PY). On 22.04.1990, he arrested accused Basti Ram, who suffered his disclosure statement (Ex.PV) that he had kept concealed a scooter in his house and could get the same recovered. In pursuance of the said disclosure statement, Basti Ram got recovered scooter bearing No.DBJ-7560 which was taken into possession vide memo (Ex.PW). The site plan (Ex.PW23/C) of the place of recovery of the scooter was prepared. He arrested appellant Satish Kumar on 05.05.1990 and got him medico- legally examined from Civil Hospital, Sonepat. The Medical Officer handed over one parcel containing underwear of the appellant which was taken into possession vide memo (Ex.PC). On 07.05.1990, the police remand of accused Satish Kumar was obtained, and taken to Veterinary Hospital, Bhainswal, and to his house at village Farmana. The demarcation memos (Ex.PW23/D and Ex.PW23/E) were prepared. He prepared the charge-sheet (report under Section 173, Cr.P.C.) and handed over the same to Inspector Chanan Singh for presentation in the Court. Before that, he obtained the birth certificate (Ex.PF) from the Health Officer, Sonepat, and the school leaving certificate (Ex.PD) from the Head Master, Govt. High School, Bhainswal. Sharma Seema 2013.08.16 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Criminal Appeal No.162-SB-1992 (O&M) ..14..
Learned Public Prosecutor tendered into evidence the affidavits Ex.PJ, Ex.PK, Ex.PL and Ex.PM of Head Constable Kala Singh, Constable Jagdish, Constable Ram Niwas and Constable Kulbir Singh, respectively. He also tendered the reports Ex.PAA and Ex.PAB of the Assistant Chemical Examiner and closed the prosecution evidence.
After completion of the prosecution evidence, statements of both the appellants, in terms of Section 313, Cr.P.C., were recorded, wherein they denied the incriminating material appearing against them and pleaded innocence.
In defence, Dr.S.S.Wadhwa (DW-1), Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Sonepat, was examined who deposed that on 10.04.1990, he radiologically examined the prosecutrix for assessing her age. On the basis of ossification test, he found her age between 16 and 17-1/2 years. The photostat copy of his report was (Ex.DC).
Thereafter, vide order dated 11.03.1992, the additional charge for the offence punishable under Section 376, IPC, was framed separately against each of the appellants, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The learned Public Prosecutor suffered statement that he did not want to lead any additional/further evidence after framing of the additional charge. However, the appellants proposed to call Sardara (PW-3) for further cross-examination and he was further cross-examined by them.
A supplementary statement, in terms of Section 313, Sharma Seema 2013.08.16 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Criminal Appeal No.162-SB-1992 (O&M) ..15.. Cr.P.C of appellant Basti Ram was recorded and thereafter, no evidence in defence was led. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sonepat, held the appellants guilty and passed the order of sentence as has been discussed in the initial part of the judgment. The appellants challenged the judgment of conviction and sentence before this Court and vide judgment dated 10.12.2003, the appeal was accepted and the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned trial court was set aside.
Dissatisfied with the judgment of acquittal passed by this Court, State of Haryana filed the Special Leave Petition before Hon'ble the Supreme Court and the same was disposed of vide judgment dated 02.04.2013. The matter was remanded to this Court for re-consideration on merits after taking into account the entire evidence on record, including the statement and testimony of the prosecutrix as well as the law on the subject.
In view of the above, the matter has been heard at length. With the assistance of learned counsel for the parties, the material available on record has also been perused.
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that Sardara (PW-3), while lodging the FIR, disclosed to the police that the prosecutrix was missing from the village, and expressed his suspicion over Mohinder and Satte for her abduction. During investigation Mohinder disclosed to ASI Jai Dev (PW-22) that on 27.02.1990, the prosecutrix was enticed away by them (Mohinder and Satte) and he left her at Delhi in the company of Sat Parkash Sharma Seema 2013.08.16 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Criminal Appeal No.162-SB-1992 (O&M) ..16.. for selling her (prosecutrix) at Bareilly but the prosecution has not explained as to what happened thereafter with regard to the said facts; that the prosecutrix was more than 16 years of age and had written love letters (Ex.D-1 to D-4), in such circumstances, it could be presumed that she was a consenting party; that from the letters (Ex.D-1 to D-4), it is made out that the prosecutrix had not disclosed the true facts during the course of investigation or while deposing before the Court below and there was a huge delay in reporting the matter to the police and there being no explanation for the same, the benefit of the same should be extended to the defence.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State vehemently controverted the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant and submitted that the prosecution version was consistent, wholly reliable and inspired confidence, therefore, the learned trial court had rightly returned the verdict of guilt of the appellants. He also argued that there was no occasion for the prosecutrix to depose falsely against such thickly related persons. He further submitted that the sole testimony of the prosecutrix was sufficient for sustaining the conviction of the appellants.
The prosecutrix has fully supported the prosecution case. She was consistent in her deposition before the Court that after her admission in the school at village Bhainswal initially Satish Parkash, her maternal uncle, behaved properly with her but after sometime, he started teasing her. After getting an Sharma Seema 2013.08.16 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Criminal Appeal No.162-SB-1992 (O&M) ..17.. opportunity, he committed rape on her against her wishes. She reported the matter to her maternal grand-mother and other adult persons of the family but no heed was paid. Satish Parkash repeatedly committed rape on her. After his (Satish Parkash) transfer to Panipat, Basti Ram (appellant) was transferred to village Bhainswal, who joined the veterinary hospital. Basti Ram also committed rape on her. It was also deposed by the prosecutrix that on 27.02.1990, Satish Parkash and Basti Ram took her to village Bhainswal from village Farmana and confined her in a quarter near the veterinary hospital and repeatedly committed rape on her. On 08.03.1990, she was taken to Delhi and handed over to two persons, who were going to Nainital with the instructions that she should be dropped at her parental home. She had also disclosed the same facts before Mrs.Vivek Bharti Sharma, learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class (PW20) while her statement was recorded in terms of Section 164, Cr.P.C. The said fact was proved by Mrs.Vivek Bharti Sharma, learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class. The version as disclosed by the prosecutrix has also been corroborated by Jaiwanti (PW-17) and Sham Singh (PW-18), who are parents of the prosecutrix.
This Court is conscious of the fact that while dealing with the case of sexual exploitation of a young girl due credence has to be attached to her testimony. The deposition of the prosecutrix by itself is sufficient to sustain conviction of the accused for the commission of rape, provided the version of the prosecutrix is worth reliable. In the matter of Bhupinder Sharma Sharma Seema 2013.08.16 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Criminal Appeal No.162-SB-1992 (O&M) ..18.. vs. State of Himachal Pradesh, 2003(4) R.C.R.(Criminal) 960; Vijay @ Chinee vs. State of Madha Pradesh (2010)8 SCC 191 and State of Rajasthan vs. Babu Meena, 2013(2) SCALE 479, Hon'ble the Supreme Court held that the statement of the prosecutrix, if found worth of credence and reliable, requires no corroboration. The Court may convict the accused on the sole testimony of the prosecutrix.
There was no reason on the part of the prosecutrix to falsely implicate her maternal uncles in such a heinous crime. The condition, in which the prosecutrix aged about 15 years, was residing at her maternal grand-father's house was exploited by Satish Parkash, who committed rape on the prosecutrix. Even after his (Satish Parkash) transfer to Panipat, Basti Ram (appellant) while taking benefit of the same condition, committed rape on the prosecutrix. In the last week of February 1990, Satish Parkash and Basti Ram joined each other in their nefarious activities and took the prosecutrix to veterinary hospital at village Bhainswal and confined her in a room and repeatedly committed rape on her. In spite of the complaint made by the prosecutrix to her grand-mother and aunt at her maternal house, no one came to her rescue. She being a girl of tender age could not gather courage to bring the nefarious activities of the accused persons to the notice of other persons, therefore, it cannot be said that she did not immediately disclose these facts to other persons.
From the testimony of the prosecutrix (PW-16), this Court is satisfied that Satish Parkash and Basti Ram committed Sharma Seema 2013.08.16 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Criminal Appeal No.162-SB-1992 (O&M) ..19.. rape on her and thereafter, committed the offence of gang rape on her, attracting the provisions of Section 376(2)(g), IPC. It has further been proved beyond shadow of doubts that the appellants had also committed the offences punishable under Sections 342, 366 and 506, IPC.
In view of the above discussion, there is no merit in the present appeal and the same is hereby dismissed qua appellant No.1, Basti Ram, whereas qua appellant No.2, Satish Kumar, it stands abated due to his death.
July 24, 2013 (Naresh Kumar Sanghi)
seema Judge
Sharma Seema
2013.08.16 17:08
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh
Criminal Appeal No.162-SB-1992 (O&M) ..20..
Basti Ram & Anr.
...Appellants
Versus
State of Haryana
...Respondent
Sharma Seema
2013.08.16 17:08
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh