Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3.The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:

3.1.The victim [PW4] is a partially deaf and completely dumb. She was aged about 37 years at the time of occurrence and also unmarried. PW1 is the father of the victim girl [PW4]. PW2 and PW7 are the sister and brother of the victim girl. On the date of occurrence, i.e., on 09.01.2009, PW1 was out of station due to some work and his wife also went for some medication.

http://www.judis.nic.in

4.On the side of the prosecution 17 witnesses were examined and 10 documents were marked.

5.PW1 is the father of the victim [PW4]. PW2 sister of the victim and PW7 younger brother of the victim have stated about the returning of the victim girl to their house with a shock and cry and also stated about the lodging of complaint [ExP1]. PW3 is the friend of PW1, who also witnessed the return of the victim from the place of occurrence; PW4 is the victim, who is a partially deaf and completely dumb and her evidence was recorded by the trial Court with the assistance of one Special Teacher Deehnal Arul Selvi and PW4 has stated about the occurrence and the injury sustained by her in the course of the incident. PW5 and PW6 villagers were examined as hearsay witnesses and they speak about the investigation by the Police. PW8 is the Doctor of the Government Hospital at Manamadurai, who examined the victim girl on 22.01.2009 and issued a certificate of examination [ExP2]. She has noted down the partially healed abrasion of 3cm x 1cm in the left shoulder of the victim. However, she did not note down any injury on her private parts. According to her, http://www.judis.nic.in the hymen was intact. PW9 to PW11 are the villagers, who accompanied PW1 for lodging the complaint, though they were treated as hostile, they have stated that the entire villagers went in support of PW1 to the Police Station to lodge the complaint [ExP1]. PW12 and PW13 were examined as witnesses for the observation mahazars [ExP3 and ExP4]. PW14 is the Police Constable, who took the victim for medical examination to the Government Hospital at Manamadurai. PW15 is the Constable, who received the complaint [ExP1] and issued the receipt in CSR No.6 of 2009 on 10.01.2009 and also accompanied the accused to the Government Hospital for medical examination. PW16 is the Doctor, who examined the accused and issued certificate of potency [ExP7] to the accused. PW17 is the Investigation Officer, who registered the complaint, conducted investigation and filed the final report in this case.

12.This Court paid its anxious consideration to the rival submissions and also perused the materials placed on record.

13.It is not in dispute that the victim girl [PW4] is a partially deaf and completely dumb. She was aged about 37 years at the time of occurrence, i.e., on 09.01.2009 and she was also an unmarried woman. The appellant in the cross examination raised a defence that he constructed a house for PW1, but PW1 did not pay the full amount and there was a due by PW1 to him. Therefore, in order to evade the payment of the balance amount, PW1 foisted a false complaint against this appellant. Though the appellant has raised such a defence, in support of the same, he has not placed any material before the Court.

17.Since the victim [PW4] is a partially deaf and completely dumb, she was examined by the trial Court with the help of a Teacher from the CSI Blind School. During her evidence, PW4 has stated about the occurrence and as pointed out by the learned Government Advocate, the injury sustained by the victim girl corroborates that the victim girl managed to escape from the attempt made by the accused to rape her.