Rajinder vs State of Haryana

Ajit Singh Bains, J.

The appellant was convicted under Section 376, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to three years'' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 400/ or in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad. He has challenged his conviction and sentence by way of this appeal.

The prosecution case as set up at the trial was that on 17th October, 1981, tournaments were held in Anangpur village. After the village tournaments were over, a variety programme was held in the village school on the night between 17th/18th October, 1981. Smt. Nathia (PW4) also went to see the variety programme. At about 11/11.30 p.m., while she was returning to her dhani (house) after seeing the variety programme and was near the field of Sohan, Rajinder appellant met her. The appellant caught hold of Smt. Nathia PW from her left wrist and dragged her to the field of Sohan. He committed rape on her inside the field of Sohan. Her alarm attracted Ram Chander and Sudesh PWs to the spot. Both the PWs ran after the appellant to apprehended him, but he escaped. Smt. Nathia PW went to her house and narrated the entire occurrence to her sons on the next morning as during the night they away in connection with their respective duties. A Panchayat was convened on the following day, but no decision was taken.

Ultimately, the matter was reported to the police by Smt. Nathia (PW 4) and the First Information Report Ex. PF was recorded in Police Station, NIT, Faridabad at 2.30 p.m. on 18th October, 1981.

Smt. Nathia (PW 4) was medically examined by Dr. Asha Kalra (PW 1) at B.K. Hospital, Faridabad on 18th October, 1981 at 8.30 p.m. The doctor found no injury on her person on external and vaginal examination. She found an old tear of hymen and the size of the utres normal. She took three vaginal swabs and the ghaghra of Smt. Nathia prosecutrix into possession. She made them into separate sealed parcels and handed them over to the police. In her crossexamination, the lady doctor stated that she found no evidence to suggest that force had been used on Smt. Nathia PW.

Dr. S.K. Mangla (PW 2) medically examined Rajinder appellant on 19th October, 1981. Vide his report Ex. PC, the doctor found as many as four injuries on his person. According to him, Rajinder was 28 years of age and was fit to perform sexual intercourse. He found no marks of external injury to the genitalia. He took into possession the langot Ex. P2 and the kachha Ex. P3 of the appellant made them into a sealed parcel and handed them over to the police.

The ghaghra of Smt. Nathia PW4 and langot Ex. P2 and kachha Ex. P3 of the appellant were sent by the police to the Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Madhuban (Karnal) for examination. The Assistant Director of the said Laboratory vide his report Ex. PK found human semen on the langot and the kachha of the appellant and ghaghra of Smt. Nathia PW.

At the trial, the appellant denied the prosecution allegations and pleaded that it was a false case. He further added that he was made to masturbate by the Police and that his langot and kachha were got strained with semen forcibly in order to create evidence against him. He further stated that he had been falsely implicated by the prosecution witnesses as they had suspected him to have illicit relations with the wife of Mahesh son of Nathia PW4. He, however, did not produce any evidence in defence.

The prosecution case rests on the testimony of Nathia (PW4). She has supported the prosecution version as given in the earlier part of the judgment. Her statement is corroborated by the testimony of Ram Chander (PW6) on all its material points. The statements of both these witnesses inspire confidence. Nathia (PW4) is an old lady of about 65 years of age and she has no ground to falsely implicate the appellant. Ram Chander (PW6) has also no animus against the appellant. According to the report Ex. PK of the Assistant Director of the Forensic Science Laboratory, human semen was found on the langot and kachha of the appellant and ghaghra of Smt. Nathia PW. This lends further assurance to be the ocular testimony of these PWs. Moreover, the investigating officer ASI Rattan Singh (PW7) also has no axe to grind against the appellant to falsely implicate him.

It was urged by Mr.Harbans Singh, learned counsel for the appellant, that no reliance can be placed on Smt. Nathia prosecutrix and Ram Chander (PW 6), who was a collateral of Smt. Nathia and that no injuries were found on the person of Smt. Nathia PW. I am not impressed by this argument Smt. Nathia PW is an old day of about 65 years. She will not falsely involve the appellant in this manner. The suggestion that Smt.Kamlesh, daughterinlaw of Smt. Nathia PW was not a woman of good character and the appellant had liaison with him is not proved on the record. Even if it may be assumed that there was suspicion about Smt. Kamlesh having illicit relations with the appellant, her motherinlaw Smt. Nathia PW, who is an old lady, would be the last person to involve herself to take revenge from the appellant. Absence of the injuries on the person of Smt. Nathia PW will not make the prosecution case doubtful. It is not the case of the prosecution that Smt. Nathia was dragged on the ground. According to Smt. Nathia PW, she was dragged by the appellant by catching hold of her wrist and then the appellant took her to the field of Sohan and committed rape upon her forcibly. The rape was committed in a wheat field and absence of injuries on the person of Smt. Nathia will not make her statement doubtful.

For the reasons recorded, I am of the view that the prosecution has succeeded in proving the case against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt and I hold that he has been rightly convicted and sentenced by the trial Court.

In the result, the appeal fails and is dismissed.