Criminal Appeal No. 1058-SB of 1998 -1- **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Appeal No. 1058-SB of 1998 Date of decision : 31.10.2008 Indraj alias Pappu .....Appellant Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. D. ANAND Present: Mr. A.S.Virk, Advocate for the appellant Mr. S.S.Mor, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Harhana . S. D. ANAND, J. The appellant was convicted by the learned Trial Judge for the commission of an offence under Section 376/511 IPC on the allegations which may be indicated as under:- The prosecutrix, an unmarried blind lady aged about 30 years had been to be outside of the village to answer the call of nature at about 3.00 P.M. The moment she got up on being relieved and was about to proceed to her house, the appellant appeared on the scene from behind and caught hold of her. Thereafter, the appellant felled her upon the ground, broke open the string of her Salwar and kissed her on cheeks and lips. Thereafter, he dragged her into the wheat field of Sunder singh and tried to commit rape upon her. An alarm raised by her attracted Mst. Bhani and one Vijay Pal to the spot. On seeing them come over, the appellant fled the spot. It were Bhani Ram and Vijay Pal who identified the appellant as the perpetrator of attempted crime and intimated that fact to Criminal Appeal No. 1058-SB of 1998 -2- **** the prosecutrix. PW-1 Vipula Gadh, Medical Officer, CHC, Kanina had medico legally examined the prosecutrix on 24.3.1998 and given her report Ex. PA. PW-1 found no injury on the private part of the prosecutrix. PW-2 Dr. Anil Kumar, CHC, Kanina had medico legally examined the appellant on 24.3.1998 and opined that there was nothing to suggest that he was incapable of performing sexual intercourse. Dr. Anil Kumar had also medico legally examined the prosecutrix on 23.3.1998 and had found the following injuries :- “1. Semi circular abrasion 2 cm long on postural lacetral aspect of upper half of right forearm. No swelling. No restriction of movement. 2. Abrasion ½ X ½ cm on under surface of left half of upper lip. No swelling. No restriction of movement. 3. Bruise 3 cm X 2 cm on left side of chin. No swelling. No restriction of movement. 4. Injury No. 4 semi circular abrasion 2 cm long on left cheek. No swelling. No restriction of movement. 5. Multiple linear scratches on right side of neck. No swelling. No restriction of movement.” He advised that Lady Medical Officer's opinion be obtained regarding the injuries on the private parts of the prosecutrix. Dr. Anil Kumar further opined that injuries found on the person of the prosecutrix had been caused within the probable duration of six hours and were simple in nature. PW-3 is the prosecutrix herself. PW-4 Mst. Bhani was attracted to the spot by the cries raised Criminal Appeal No. 1058-SB of 1998 -3- **** by the prosecutrix. She had identified the appellant at the spot iself. PW-5 Dharam Pal is the father of the prosecutrix. PW-6 Dinesh had photographed the spot on 24.3.1998 and he proved photographs Ex. P1 to Ex.P4, Ex. P5 to Ex. P8 being their negatives. PW-7 Dharambir Singh, Patwari Halqa had, on 27.4.1998 prepared scaled site plan Ex. PG of the spot. PW-8 Inspector Dalbir Singh had investigated this case. The appellant raised a pure and simple plea of innocence and averred as under:- “The witnesses are deposing falsely being the relations of prosecutrix Smt. Lali. The police confined me in the Police Station in the morning of 23.3.1998 and as the identity of the culprit was known to the prosecutrix being a blind, so the police planted this case upon me to prove its Karguzari and I am innocent.” The appellant did not opt to adduce any evidence in defence. Learned counsel for the appellant argues that eye witnesses had been falsely introduced into the picture to fix the appellant as perpetrator of the crime in view of the fact that the prosecutrix being a blind lady was not in a position to identify the culprit. The plea raised is denuded of merit. There is not even a suggestion to Mst. Bhani to the effect that she had any inimical inclination on account whereof she would have been inclined to frame the appellant in this case. In the normal course of things, a co-villlager would not falsely implicate a village mate for ethical reasons and also fear of understandable reprisal at the hands of co-villager who is falsely implicated in a case. Criminal Appeal No. 1058-SB of 1998 -4- **** The evidence of PW-6 Dharam Pal is also worthy of reliance being a part of res-gestae. There was nothing unnatural on the part of the prosecutrix in having shared the information with her mother on her return home. There was equally nothing unnatural on the part of the mother of the prosecutrix in sharing that information with her husband/father of the prosecutrix. Further, it requires pertinent notice that it is a matter of common observation that people are normally reluctant to make a public show of cases of this category. Consciously or unconsciously, the social esteem of a family whose female child is violated or is attempted to be violated, goes down. It is for fear of being stigmatised that people in the village would refrain from bring such facts to light. The presumption, thus, in the circumstances of the case would be that the allegation levelled against the appellant is factually correct. It may be noticed that, in the course of the statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C., it was averred by the appellant that the witnesses had deposed falsely being the relations of the prosecutrix and he had been falsely implicated by the police inspite of the fact that the blind prosecutrix could not nave been in a position to identify the culprit. The averment aforementioned at the hands of the appellant does not lead the plea of innocence any where. As already noticed, there is not even an allegation that the witnesses had any score to settle with the appellant on account of which they would have been inclined to falsely implicate him in this case. Further, there is also no reason why the police would have falsely involved the appellant on the charge for which he stands convicted. The deposition on oath of the prosecutrix that the appellant gave her a cheek bite and that she had struggled to offer resistance is borne out by the fact that as many as five injuries were found on her Criminal Appeal No. 1058-SB of 1998 -5- **** person. In the light of the foregoing discussion, it is held that appeal is devoid of merit and is ordered to be dismissed. However, in view of the fact that the appellant is facing ordeal of trial/appeal since the year 1998, the substantive sentence awarded to him is reduced by one year. Except with that modification, the appeal shall stand dismissed. October 31, 2008 (S.D. ANAND) Pka JUDGE