High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Unknown vs Brahman on 12 August, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Unknown vs Brahman on 12 August, 2009
      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                   AT CHANDIGARH


                                  Criminal Misc. No. 309-MA of 2000

                                  Dated of Decision:- August 12, 2009


State of Haryana         Versus         Naseeb Khan



CORAM:      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHTAB S.GILL
            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN


Present:-   Sh. S.S.Patter, Sr. D.A.G., Haryana.

                         ------


MEHTAB S.GILL, J.

Learned counsel for the State has argued, that the prosecutrix

was returning to her village and when she reached near the field of Kalia

Brahman, respondent waylaid her, molested her and thereafter raped her.

This was witnessed by Tappu @ Randhir, who tried to catch hold of

respondent-Naseeb Khan, but Naseeb Khan ran away. This occurrence was

narrated to the father of the prosecutrix, but out of fear and of loosing face

amongst their co-villagers, they did not report the matter to the police.

Respondents in fact registered a false case against the complainant party.

There is cogent evidence. The prosecutrix appeared as PW1,

Dr.Gopal Goyal PW2 and 12 other witnesses i.e. Rameshwar PW3, Dr.

Minakshi PW4, C.Dilbagh Singh PW5, E/ASI Ram Phal PW6, E/ASI Karan

Singh PW7, L/Const. Usha Rani PW8, SI Virender Singh PW9, ASI Jai

Bhagwan PW10, Ms Archna Smrat PW11, Dr. M.L.Kochar PW12, Randhir
2

Criminal Misc. No. 309-MA of 2000

alias Tappu PW13 and ASI Ram Kumar PW14 came forward to support the

prosecution case. Learned trial Court has erred in acquitting the respondent.

We have heard the learned counsel for the State and perused

the impugned judgment.

The prosecutrix appeared as PW1 and stated categorically that

no rape was committed on her. She stated that she did not go anywhere, but

was cleaning the utensils, when the police took her and Naseeb Khan to the

police station. Naseeb Khan was falsely implicated by her cousin Tabu.

She thumb-marked on some blank papers. Naseeb Khan, who is present in

Court, did not commit rape on her. Rameshwar PW3, the father of the

prosecutrix, also did not support the prosecution version. He stated that no

rape was committed on his daughter. Though he was declared hostile, but

his testimony could not be shattered in his cross-examination.

We do not find any infirmity in the judgment of the learned

trial Court.

Dismissed.


                                             (MEHTAB S.GILL)
                                                 JUDGE



                                          (JITENDRA CHAUHAN)
August 12, 2009                                  JUDGE
SKArora
                                     3

Criminal Misc. No. 309-MA of 2000