State of Haryana vs Matru @ Ved Prakash

V.K. Bali, J.

Matru alias Ved Prakash aged 22 years then a student was tried under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code pertaining to F.I.R. No. 125 dated 14th June, 1991, Police Station Kanina and after resultant trial was acquitted by Sessions Judge, Narnaul, vide judgment dated 29th of February, 1992. It is against this order of acquittal that the State of Haryana has filed the present appeal.

Brief facts of the case reveal that an F.I.R. under Section 376 read with Section 511 of the Indian Penal Code came to be recorded against Matru alias Ved Prakash on the statement made by Lakhi Ram on 14th of June, 1991, which when translated into English reads as follows :

"I am a resident of village Kanina and run a barbar shop near the bus stand of Kanina. About 15 years ago I was married with Bimla d/o Prabhu Dayal, Nai, r/o Bhindawa. Now, I have a daughter namely Mamta aged 13 years. She has studied upto 6th class. Yesterday I had gone to village Madal in connection with Lagan ceremony of the daughter of Jagmal Pakoriwala. I returned at about 11 P.M. and my wife Bimla told me that Matru @ Ved Prakash son of Attar Singh, Ahir by caste, r/o Kanina had come to our house at the time when at about 7 P.M. my wife had gone to the house of Jagmal for extending invitation (in the neighbourhood). My daughter Mamta was alone in the house. Matru said to my daughter Mamta, "The rent of our shop is due towards your Chacha (father''s younger brother) which he has not paid so far." On seeing the girl alone Matru took her in his arms, threw her on the cot, broke the string of her Salwar and fell upon Mamta. My daughter raised an alarm. During this period my wife Bimla came there who saw Matru grappling with my daughter. On seeing Bimla, Matru after leaving my daughter and holding his pants in hand, which was lying open ran away. In this scuffle the bangles of my daughter had also broken, which are lying on the spot. My wife narrated this entire occurrence to me on my return to our house. I could not come to the Police Station due to night time. Now I was going to Police Station for lodging a report that you have met me. I have got recorded my statement, I have heard and the same is correct. Action may be taken.

Sd/ Lakhi Ram."

The statement was recorded by Head Constable who along with Phul Kumar Constable No. 614 and Pritam Singh Constable No. 607 was going towards Kanina Mandi in connection with patrolling and when Lakhi Ram had met him near Civil Hospital, Kanina and had made his statement, as referred to above. The facts disclosed in the F.I.R. made out a case under Sections 376/511 of the Indian Penal Code and therefore, the F.I.R. was registered not for rape but for an attempt to rape.

Dr. Amarwati Singhla who examined the prosecutrix Mamta PW7 found that she was moderately built and her breasts were developed and there was scanty growth of hair in axila and hair were present in the pubic region. No injury was found on any part of the body of Mamta. Hair were present on the valva. Hymen was absent. There was tenderness. Vagina of Mamta admitted one finger. On 17th July, 1991, on an application made by the police to Dr. Amarwati Singhla it was stated by the Doctor that the final opinion regarding rape on the victim shall be given after receipt of report from the Chemical Examiner. The prosecution version was broadly supported by Mamta PW7 the prosecutrix and her mother PW8. While appreciating the medical, ocular and other evidence that was brought on record of the case the learned Sessions Judge came to the conclusion that no rape was committed on prosecutrix Mamta PW7. The following observations of the learned Sessions Judge which concededly are based upon correct reading of evidence of the prosecutrix and her mother as also medical evidence need to be mentioned :

"If Mamta PW7 had told Bimla PW8 that the accused had committed rape with her and Bimla PW8 had also seen the accused committing forcible sexual inter course with Mamta then it is not understood as to why while lodging the report Ex. PA it was simply alleged that the accused had attempted to commit rape with Mamta and as to why it was not alleged that the accused had in fact committed rape with Mamta. Furthermore it is highly doubtful that after the arrival of Bimla PW8, the accused could have broken the string of the salwar of Mamta PW7 and that he could have raped Mamta PW7.

A perusal of the report Ex. PQ which had been received from Forensic Science Laboratory, Haryana, Madhuban, shows that human semen had been detected on the underwear of the accused and that human semen had not been detected on the salwar, the underwear and the vaginal slides and swabs of Mamta. The presence of semen on the underwear of the accused could be on account of many reasons because it is not known as to when the underwear of the accused was last washed before it was taken into possession by the police. The absence of semen on the salwar, the underwear and the vaginal slides and swabs of Mamta also tends to show that in all probability no rape had been committed with Mamta as alleged by the prosecution.

Mamta PW7 stated during her crossexamination that her salwar and underwear had got stained with blood and that blood had also fallen on the cot during the course of the forcible sexual inter course. The report Ex. PQ which had been received from the Forensic Science Laboratory, Haryana, Madhuban, does not indicate that any blood had been detected on the Salwar and the underwear of the prosecutrix."

Faced with the findings recorded by the learned Sessions Judge as has been reproduced above, Mr. Varinder Singh, Deputy Advocate General was fair enough to state that respondent Matru alias Ved Prakash has rightly been acquitted for a charge under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. He, however, contends that if charge under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code is not sustainable on the strength of the findings recorded above by the learned Sessions Judge, the respondent ought to have been dealt with under Sections 376/511 i.e. attempt to commit rape. However, when confronted with the contention raised by the other side that the witnesses who had given evidence on material issues and had not come up with truth, could not be relied, the learned Counsel appearing for the appellantState could not urge anything more.

After going through the records and hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, we are convinced that the respondent Matru alias Ved Prakash has rightly been acquitted and the judgment passed by the learned Sessions Judge needs no interference. The appeal preferred by the State is, thus, dismissed.