news details |
|
|
| HC upholds acquittal of PSO in rape case | | | Jammu, Sept 24 : A Division Bench of State High Court Comprising Justice Virender Singh and Justice Bansi Lal Bhat upheld the acquittal of one Yog Raj Sharma who was attached as PSO with Bhagat Chuni Lal, facing trial in a rape case.
According to the police case, Yog Raj Sharma while attached as a security personnel with complainant-Bhagat Chuni Lal committed rape with the daughter of complainant at gun point when she was studying in 10+2. It was only after transfer of the accused that the prosecutrix complained about rape and disclosed that she had conceived and police registered a case and after completion of investigation challan was presented and trial court acquitted the accused from the charges levled against him as prosecution failed to prove its case. Against the acquittal, State preferred an appeal.
This approved for reporting judgment written by Justice Bansi Lal Bhat for the Division Bench observed that in the instant case Trial Court, has dwelt upon the aspect of reliability of testimony of prosecutrix who has alleged that she was subjected to molestation and finally raped by accused at 9 a.m when she was studying and her parents house and other family members had gone out in the fields for carrying out agricultural pursuits. The Trial Court noticed that the alleged occurrence is said to have taken place in the bed room of the accused.
He referred to testimony of prosecutrix to demonstrate that she had nowhere alleged that she was forcibly taken by the accused to his bed room and subjected to rape.
He also noticed that the bed room of accused was adjoining the room of complainant and his son Shakti Kumar. He also noticed that the house of complainant was a double story house, stationing a SPO post on the first floor and a Sentry would remain deployed at the Sentry Post.
Thus, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge found that the version of prosecutrix that she had starting crying when assaulted did not appear to be true as around 20 police personnel were posted there for security of complainant and cries of prosecutrix did not attract the attention of security personnel in the same house and the Sentry deployed there in front of the house. It further appears that the prosecutrix did not complain of rape for nearly 11 months, despite the fact that she was living in her house under the care and protection of parents and that too when adequate security personnel were posted there to guard her family. Her conduct in maintaining silence over a long period of 11 months after the alleged incident, despite having access to her parents, siblings and the police personnel posted there, demonstrates her conduct as a consent party and not a victim of the crime. The complaint emanating from her appears to have been made only after pregnancy was detected.
It is, therefore, a case where corroboration or an assurance to charge of rape is lacking and testimony of prosecutrix qua allegation of rape is highly unreliable.
Undoubtedly her conduct at the time of alleged crime and thereafter for a period spanning 11 months betrays her role as a victim of crime. On testimony of prosecutrix and other evidence brought on record during trial, Division Bench is of the considered opinion that the view taken by the Trial Court is flawless. No contrary view is possible on the evidence brought on record. With these observations Court dismissed the appeal filed by the state and upheld the acquittal. JNF |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
