Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
State vs Sundeep Singh @ Sunni on 6 November, 2013
Author: Govind Mathur
Bench: Govind Mathur
S.B. CRIMINAL LEAVE TO APPEAL NO.51/2013
State of Rajasthan
Vs.
Sandeep Singh @ Sunni
Date of Order :: 31.10.2013
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR
Mr. K.R. Bishnoi, Public Prosecutor
...
The application seeking leave to appeal the judgment dated 18.1.2013 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Raisinghnagar is barred by limitation by 02 days. An application seeking condonation of delay has been filed. Having considered the reasons given therein, the same is accepted. The delay in filing leave to appeal is condoned.
Heard learned Public Prosecutor on merits. The learned Additional Sessions Judge by the judgment impugned acquitted accused-respondent from the charge relating to commission of offence under Sections 366 and 376 I.P.C. The accused-respondent has also been extended with the benefit probation.
The argument advanced by learned Public Prosecutor is that the prosecutrix (PW-5) herself stated that the accused subject her to intercourse without her consent, as such, the charge of commission of offence punishable under Section 376 I.P.C. is established. The trial court erred while ignoring the definite statement made by prosecutrix.
I have examined the judgment impugned in lucid. This witness, though, has stated that Sandeep was keeping him under intoxication by giving drugs but also stated that she was friendly with Sandeep and left her house on foot, then she proceeded with him in a bus to Jalandhar and also stayed at Fagwada in a 'gurudwara'. During this entire period she did not utter any word about the ill- conduct of Sandeep.
From examination of statement given by PW-5, in totality it reveals that as a matter of fact no rape as alleged by the prosecutrix was committed. Suffice to mention here that in the list of witnesses, one Smt. Kamlesh W/o. Mahar Singh was also cited as a witness to support the prosecution case but she was not brought to the witness- box.
Having considered the entire material available on record, I do not find any wrong with the judgment impugned that may warrant grant of leave as prayed for.
The leave application, therefore, is dismissed.
(GOVIND MATHUR), J.
Sanjay