news details |
|
|
| Rape accused acquitted | | | Early Times Report
Jammu, Jan 9: Allowing the appeal filed by the accused convict against the judgment of
the Sessions Judge Poonch on May 6, 2004 awarding 13 years rigorous imprisonment and
fine of Rs.16000, Justice Vinod Kumar Gupta of J&K High Court Jammu Wing today set
aside the judgment and acquitted the appellant of the charges framed against him and
also discharged the bail bond and personal bond of the accused.
One Mohammed Yousaf lodged a written report with police station Mendhar on July 31, 1997 alleging that on the intervening night of 28/29 July 1997, the accused with criminal intention entered in the house of complainant and forcibly abducted the prosecutrix and took her to Jammu and Srinagar and committed rape with her against her wishes. On this written report, FIR was registered u/s 363/109 RPC and investigation in the case started. During investigation prosecutrix was recovered from a hotel situated near Jewel Chowk Jammu. The prosecutrix was examined medically and her statement u/s 164 Cr PC was also got recorded by the police and after completion of the investigation challan was presented u/s 304, 376 RPC r/w section 342 RPC was presented in the Court of law and Sessions Judge Poonch awarded RI for 13 years in all the sections which was challenged in the appeal, in the state High Court, the High Court suspended the sentence and granted bail to the accused.
Justice Gupta, after hearing both the sides, observed that the prosecutrix has admitted that she came by foot from village to Surankote Town from where they boarded a bus and came to Jammu and stayed in a hotel, next day they went to Srinagar by bus and stayed their in a house boat for six days. Thereafter they came back to Jammu by bus. Although she has deposed that she made who and cry and also informed number of persons including the police but no body came to her help. This deposition of prosecutrix is unnatural and unbelievable. On the other hand the conduct of the prosecutrix clearly shows that she was a willing party and she eloped with the accused. She is major as per medical record and admitted by the Investigating Officer. Being major, the prosecutrix is a consenting/willing party to accompany the accused and having sexual intercourses with the accused. The prosecutrix had sufficient opportunities to raise who and cry and get the accused arrested in case she had been forcibly taken away by the accused. He has admitted that the army checked the bus in which they were traveling and also checked the identity card of the accused at Naka while they were traveling from Surankote to Jammu in a bus. The prosecutrix had not availed opportunities and raises an inference that she was consenting party. In such circumstances, it cannot be said that the accused had committed any offence.
Court further observed that there is a motive for the complainant and to avoid the marriage of prosecutrix with the accused as promised, the accused might have been involved in this case. The improbable and unbelievable evidence of the prosecutrix, coupled with conduct of prosecutrix showing that she was willing party and the delay in lodging the report, raise reasonable doubt that the accused might have been involved in the case, thus the accused is entitled to benefit of doubt and is acquitted of the charges. JNF
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
