Crl.R.No.2027 of 2010 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.R.No.2027 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 30.7.2010. Pardeep and another ....................Petitioners v. State of Haryana and another .....................Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Jaswant Singh Present: Mr.Bipan Ghai,Senior Advocate with Mr.Sandeep Gehlot,Advocate for the petitioners. Jaswant Singh.J.(Oral) Crl.M.No.38712/2010 seeking exemption to file certified copies of Annexures P5 and P6 is allowed and the Annexures are taken on record. Crl.R.No.2027 of 2010. Present revision petition under Section 401 Cr.PC has been filed by petitioners Pardeep and Sonu, challenging the order dated 1.6.2010, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rewari, whereby they have been summoned under Section 319 Cr.PC as additional accused to stand trial in case FIR No. 209 dated 30.12.2009 under Sections 376,323,325, registered at PS Rampura. Briefly noticed, as per allegations in the FIR, on 30.12.2009, prosecutrix-Mridula, after answering the call of nature in a mustard field was putting on her underwear and salwar. At that time Kamal Singh son of Mahinder Singh-co-accused of the petitioners came there, Crl.R.No.2027 of 2010 (O&M) 2 dragged the prosecutrix upto some distance in the mustard field and after pressing her mouth with one hand felled her down and forcibly committed rape with her and thereafter she became unconscious. After the occurrence, she was found groaning there by her father Raju and Jaithani Mamta, who were searching for her. The prosecutrix was taken to Government Hospital,Rewari, where police allegedly recorded her statement on the basis of which FIR was lodged only against co- accused Kamal. On the same day i.e. 30.12.2009 she was medico legally examined by Dr.Anju vide MLR Annexure P-1. At the time of her medico legal examination, slurring of speech was noticed by the Doctor conducting the medico legal examination. After her medico-legal examination, it appears that the prosecutrix was discharged after 1-1/2 hour. The prosecutrix was again brought to Civil Hospital,Rewari on 1.1.2010 and her supplementary medico-legal report (Annexure P/2) was prepared in which complaining of pain was recorded over (i) neck region, (ii) Left arm and forearm and (iii) pain in both legs and thighs. X-ray was advised in respect of all these three injuries. Besides that Redness of eyes (both) over conjunctival region was also noticed. A perusal of examination-in-chief [P3 (colly)] of prosecutrix recorded on 11.5.2010, reveals that as her medical condition did not improve, she was referred to PGIMS Rohtak, where she remained admitted from 4.1.2010 to 22.1.2010. Further a perusal of Annexures P5 and P6 reveals that immediately after her discharge prosecutrix Crl.R.No.2027 of 2010 (O&M) 3 made a representation dated 28.1.2010 to SP Rewari, narrating her ordeal therein. In the said representation it was alleged by her that at the time of commission of offence accused Kamal was accompanied by two other persons and one of them was being named by Kamal as Sonu whereas she did not know the name of third accomplice but could recognise, if produced before her. It was specifically alleged by her that at that time her eyes were closed by force and she was also slapped and all the accused committed rape upon her. It is also stated therein that she was taken to Government Hospital Rewari by her father Raju and Jethani (sister-in-law). It was also alleged by her that due to shock and her bad condition she could not tell the name of other two accused at that time and hence was naming Kamal alone. It was also alleged by her that Doctor at Civil Hospital Rewari had not conducted her proper medico legal examination. To the similar effect is another representation (P6) made to various authorities including DGP Haryana.. At the time of her cross examination on 24.5.2010, learned Public Prosecutor assisted by counsel for the complainant moved an application under Section 319 Cr.PC for summoning the petitioner. The learned Additional Sessions Judge,Rewari after hearing both sides vide impugned order dated 1.6.2006 ordered the summoning of the petitioners under Section 319 Cr.PC. Hence the present revision petition. Crl.R.No.2027 of 2010 (O&M) 4 It was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the impugned order is liable to be set aside on the following grounds:- (i)The petitioners were not named in the FIR. (ii)Even at the time of her medico legal examination at Government Hospital,Rewari, in the presence of her parents and sister in law, the prosecutrix had only named accused Kamal. (iii)Prosecutrix made application to IG Rewari on 28.1.2010, i.e., after a delay of 28 days and on the basis of the said application, statement Ex.DA of prosecutrix was recorded on 12.4.2010 in which she had named the present petitioners. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners, I do not find any merit in the contentions raised above. Regarding the first two contentions, it may be noticed that as per MLR Ex.P1, at the time of her medico legal examination the doctor had noticed that there was slurring of speech, meaning thereby that the prosecutrix was not in her full senses. Even in her statement recorded in the Court on 11.5.2010, the prosecutrix had categorically stated that at the time of recording of her statement in Civil Hospital, Rewari by police she was only moaning and crying while naming Kamal. Thereafter police obtained her thumb impression and at that time her entire body was trembling and she was quite fearful. Such a medical condition of prosecutrix is corroborated by the fact that she was again Crl.R.No.2027 of 2010 (O&M) 5 brought to Civil Hospital,Rewari on 1.1.2010 where her supplementary medico legal examination was conducted and four injuries were noticed on her person. Thereafter due to her medical condition she was referred to PGIMS, Rohtak where she remained admitted for 18 days i.e. from 4.1.2010 to 22.1.2010. Thus, there is nothing unusual if due to her bad medical condition on the day of occurrence, especially when her speech was slurry and her body was trembling, that the prosecutrix could not disclose the name of petitioners, who were accompanying co- accused Kamal, only whom prosecutrix knew earlier. As regards the delay of 18 days in representing to IG Rewari is concerned, the reason is obvious. After the occurrence the prosecutrix had become unconscious. She was brought to Civil Hospital,Rewari by her father and Jethani firstly on 30.12.2009 and then again on 1.1.2010 and it is thereafter that due to her bad medical condition she was referred to PGIMS Rohtak from 4.1.2010 to 22.1.2010. Thereafter on 28.1.2010 she made a representation to the IG Rewari in which she named the present accused. Thus, the delay is explained, besides being natural in such a situation. From the evidence available on record so far, prima facie no fault can be found with the order dated 1.6.2010 passed by the learned trial Court, summoning the petitioners under Section 319 Cr.PC as additional accused to face trial. In my opinion, no case for interference is made out. Hence the present revision petition is dismissed. However, it is clarified that nothing stated hereinabove shall be construed as an Crl.R.No.2027 of 2010 (O&M) 6 opinion on the merits of the case and the learned Trial Court shall be absolutely free to form its opinion on the basis of material placed on record. 30.7.2010 (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge