Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 376(2)(g) – Rape – In Indian Society no father will make such a false allegation ruining the future life of his minor daughter, because such allegation is destructive of the whole personality of the victim. A murderer destroys the physical body of his victim, but a rapist degrades the very soul of the helpless female.
In this case a heinous crime has been committed and the accused must suffer for his consequences. A rapist not only violates the victim personal integrity, but leaves indelible marks on the very soul of the helpless female. In this case a minor girl aged 17 years had been ravished by the two accused, who must have undergone a traumatic experience. As a matter of fact the crime is not only against the victim, it is against the whole society as well.
Hon’ble Krishna Pratap Singh,J.
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. – 3760 of 2008
Appellant :- Taukir And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Gaurav Kakkar, D.R. Choudhary, Devendra Singh, G.S, Hajela, Irfan Ahmad Malik, Sunil Dubey, V. S.Mishra, Viresh Misra Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate, Atul Kumar
This criminal appeal has been filed against a judgement and order dated 09.5.2008 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Saharanpur in ST No. 405 of 2007 arising out of case crime No. 163 of 2007 whereby the appellants have been convicted and sentenced to ten years RI under section 376(2)(g) IPC and a fine of Rs. 2000/- each and in default of payment of fine the appellants were directed to further undergo six months simple imprisonment. The appellants were further convicted and sentenced to six month imprisonment under section 323 IPC.
The facts as unfolded by the prosecution, in brief, are that a written report Ext. Ka-1 was handed over by the complainant of the case Shamshad, son of Shabbir, resident of village Hoaz Khedi at the police station Kotwali Dehat, Saharanpur on 15.3.2007 at 12.30 P.M., to the effect that his minor niece (name withheld) (hereinafter referred to as the victim) and his wife Mursida were at home whereas mother of the victim had gone to her Maika. On being asked by Makhruda, the neighbour that her mother had called her on telephone, the victim after taking permission from Mursida, her aunt, had gone to talk to her mother on telephone. When the victim did not return for 30 minutes, the complainant went to the house of Makhruda and enquired about the victim. On being told by Makhruda that the victim after talking on telephone went away some time back, the complainant along with other family members started searching the victim, but in vain. On 12.3.2007, when they were searching the victim and talking loudly in the sugarcane field and as soon as they reached at the sugarcane field of Tajmul, the Pradhan, the victim in an unconscious state came and started weeping. The complainant brought the victim home. Several persons were also there along with the complainant. On enquiry, the victim told him the sensational story. The victim told the complainant that Taukir, son of Irfan and Wasim, son of Munfait committed rape on her throughout the night one by one and have also beaten her. It is further mentioned in the report that on account of pressure of responsible persons, compromise was going on as the matter involves his reputation, but as the compromise could not be arrived at, he has lodged the report and prayed for necessary action in the matter.
On the basis of the aforesaid report a case was registered at case crime No. 163 of 2007, under sections 376/323/506 IPC, police station Kotwali Dehat, Saharanpur by PW-5 Head Muharrir Sunil Kumar (Ext. Ka-5), which was entered into GD vide Ext. Ka-6.
After the registration of the first information report, the law set into motion and investigation of the case was entrusted to PW-6 SI Itwari Lal, who recorded the statements of the complainant and the victim and inspected the spot of occurrence on the pointing out of the complainant and prepared site plan, which he proved as Ext. Ka-7. On 22.3.2007 he got the medical examination of the victim conducted. Thereafter this witness has proceeded on leave and remaining investigation of the case was conducted by PW-7 SI Munna Singh, who after completing the remaining investigation submitted the charge sheet against the appellants under section 376/323/506 IPC, which he proved as Ext. Ka-8.
As the case was exclusively triable by the court of sessions, the learned Magistrate committed the case to the court of sessions. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Saharanpur vide order dated 12.7.2007 framed the charges against the accused4 appellants under section 376(2)(g) and 323 IPC.
To bring home the guilt of the appellants, the prosecution has examined as many as eight witnesses.