Punjab-Haryana High Court
Nirmala vs State Of Haryana & Ors on 20 August, 2015
Author: T.P.S. Mann
Bench: T.P.S.Mann
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Appeal No. D-934-DB of 2015
Date of Decision : August 20, 2015
Nirmala .....Appellant
VERSUS
State of Haryana and others .....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S.MANN
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURMIT RAM
Present : Ms. Garima Sharma, Advocate.
T.P.S. MANN, J.
The appellant, who is mother of 15 years' old prosecutrix, has filed the present appeal for challenging the judgment dated 26.3.2015 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhiwani whereby respondents No.2 and 3 stand acquitted of the charges under Sections 120-B, 312 and 201 IPC.
The case of the prosecution, in nutshell, is that Vinod and Rafik, teachers of Government Senior Secondary School, Dudhwa, where the prosecutrix was a student of 9th class, used to rape her inside the bathroom after alluring her with toffees as she was mentally challenged. Both the accused had threatened her that her name would be struck off from the rolls in case she disclosed about the same to anyone. Further, respondent No.2-Sunita, who was posted as ANM and respondent No.3-Urmila, who was an Asha worker, had taken the prosecutrix to Dadri and after giving her an injection, aborted the foetus.
Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and on SATISH KUMAR 2015.08.26 13:47 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh Criminal Appeal No. D-934-DB of 2015 -2- going through the impugned judgment, this Court finds that as per the disclosure statements Ex.P1 of respondent No.3-Urmila and Ex.P2 of respondent No.2-Sunita, the prosecutrix was brought by her mother and, thereafter, respondents No.2 and 3 had taken her to Sangwan Jacha Bacha Hospital, Dadri where they administered her some tablet. Further, the prosecutrix could not collect any material to establish as to which tablet was administered to the prosecutrix so as to hold as to which tablet resulted in the foetus being aborted. Further, team of doctors consisted of Dr. Sandeep, Dr. Ved Rattan and Dr. Pooja inspected the Sangwan Jacha Bacha Hospital and on going through the record they did not find the name of the prosecutrix mentioned therein. PW4 Dr. Sandeep admitted during his cross-examination that the articles taken into possession from the hospital were usually available in the market for general gynae practice. Over and above, the prosecution has failed to lead sufficient evidence to establish that on account of commission of rape upon her, the prosecutrix had conceived.
In view of the above, no fault can be found in the impugned judgment to the extent of acquitting respondents No.2 and 3 of the charges against them.
The appeal is without any merit and, therefore, dismissed.
( T.P.S. MANN )
JUDGE
( GURMIT RAM )
August 20, 2015 JUDGE
SATISH KUMAR satish
2015.08.26 13:47
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
Chandigarh