C.R.R. No.176 of 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 19.01.2011 1) C.R.R. No.176 of 2008 Gurmel Singh ……Petitioner Versus The State of Punjab and others ……Respondents 2) C.R.M. No.11264-M of 2008 (O&M) Makko Kaur ……Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI -.- Present: Mr. Ashok Kumar Khunger, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Gazi Mohammad, D.A.G., Punjab. *** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? AJAY TEWARI, J. (ORAL) C.R.R. No.176 of 2008 -2- This order shall dispose of C.R.R. No.176 of 2008 and CRM No.11264-M of 2008 as common questions of law and facts are involved in these cases. This petition has been filed against the acquittal of respondents No.2 and 3 i.e. Rano Kaur and Mukko Kaur, while the CRM No.11264-M of 2008 has been filed by one of the acquitted accused for re-investigation and for registration of a case against the complainant for having falsely implicated the said acquitted accused. As regards the acquittal of the said two accused, learned Court below has noticed that the prosecutrix was admitted at Pingalwara on 11.10.2003 and was released in the custody of her father, the present petitioner, on 21.3.2004. He has thus disbelieved the version of rape having been committed on the prosecutrix because as per his view there could be no traces of semen after so many months. As regards the allegations under Sections 363 and 366 also the learned Court below has held that there is no iota of evidence against these two respondents. As regards the other revision, I find that no case has been made out for conducting D.N.A. test on the complainant or to lodge a criminal case against the complainant for having implicated the acquitted accused. Consequently, both the petitions are dismissed. ( AJAY TEWARI ) January 19, 2011 JUDGE ashish