news details |
|
|
| Court discharges father, his three sons in rape case | | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, Mar 29: Principal Sessions Judge Udhampur, Y P Bourney discharged a father and his three sons in rape case with the observations that allegations against the accused are too vague and absurd to be probable and hence, can't be accepted on the face value since fabrications/manipulations are at galore.
Principal Sessions Judge Udhampur observed that from the material on record, it is revealed that there are two incidents clubbed in the in one and the same charge sheet. The first incident is alleged to have taken place on 2nd of October 2018, when, it is alleged that accused Ram Paul entered into the house of the informant/victim and finding her alone tried to commit rape upon her.
The second incident is alleged to have taken place on 30th of October when all the four accused persons are alleged to have entered into the house of the informant and assaulted her. Admittedly the first incident was not reported to police and instead the wife of accused-1 was apprised.
As regards the subsequent incident, it is alleged that on 3010-2018, accused Ram Paul called the husband of the informant at a shop to sort out the issue as to his liability on account of purchase of land but latter invited him to his house and then asked as to why he had misbehaved with his wife. It is further alleged that all the accused became furious and accused Manu lifted a stick and assaulted the informant, who was saved by her husband.
Upon careful consideration of the material on record, one thing is very clear and that is, the parties are at loggerheads on account of a dispute with respect to the sale consideration and dimensions of the land which husband of the informant has admittedly purchased from accused 1, but transaction has remained incomplete owing to the reasons that a part of sale consideration remained was still to be paid and also husband of the informant had allegedly brought under construction excess land (about half marla) than what was agreed to be sold to him. The husband of the informant has already raised the construction of a residential house over the land in question and his family has already moved in and started residing there.
The court observed that there are allegations against one of the accused whom the informant has identified as Manu having attempted to assault her. The said accused is further alleged to be serving in the state police. However, there is absolutely no allegation against the other three of them except they were also present on spot. As regards the earlier incident of a sexual assault on the informant, no report was lodged anywhere in that behalf though more than four weeks have elapsed except that wife of the accused was informed. The alleged incident was witnessed by the children of informant especially her elder son who happened to be eight years age at that time but nothing is said as to why he has not been examined/got examined when he was the only eye-witness to the occurrence.
The court said that it sounds very strange that a simple brawl is reported immediately to police and sought to be investigated but the graver offences were brushed aside simply by calling on and sharing with the wife of accused who too has not been questioned during investigation to ascertain the truth. Such an incident wouldn't have been dealt so lightly by the husband of the victim who stayed away from his house most of the time being a driver by profession being fully conscious of the fact that his wife stayed alone most of the time and if not dealt appropriately, it could happen again at any time, still he chose not to lodge the report with police being. Thus, there is every possibility of manipulating such additions purposely in order to ensure police action with the object of harassing and humiliating the accused persons particularly accused-1, who happens to be a police employee of more than fifty five years of age and the others are his three young sons in their twenties for pressuring them to give up their legitimate claims.
The court observed that the legal position is thus, being well settled, framing of the charges against the accused persons is not an idle formality but the first important step which not only marks the beginning but also defines the broader contours of the trial and court has the onerous responsibility of sifting and weighing the material for that limited purpose placed before it by the investigating officer which is collected by him during the course of investigation. There has to be some material to show prima facie the involvement of accused persons or at least to give rise to a grave suspicion zeroing down at them justifying the framing of charges and putting them to trial. Court discharged the accused Ram Paul Sharma, Sunny Sharma, Munish Sharma and Sahil Sharma all sons of Ram Paul Sharma at the time of framing charges. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
