{"id":113343,"date":"2003-02-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2003-02-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-singh-son-of-shri-mam-raj-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-6-february-2003"},"modified":"2018-12-08T00:56:23","modified_gmt":"2018-12-07T19:26:23","slug":"vikram-singh-son-of-shri-mam-raj-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-6-february-2003","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-singh-son-of-shri-mam-raj-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-6-february-2003","title":{"rendered":"Vikram Singh Son Of Shri Mam Raj vs The State Of Haryana on 6 February, 2003"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Vikram Singh Son Of Shri Mam Raj vs The State Of Haryana on 6 February, 2003<\/div>\n
Author: R Anand<\/div>\n
Bench: R Anand, V Singh<\/div>\n<\/p>\n
<\/pre>\n
JUDGMENT<\/p>\n
R.L. Anand, J.  <\/p>\n
1. By this judgment we dispose of four criminal
\nappeals No. 583-DB-2001 titled Vikram Singh v. State of
\nHaryana No. 373-SB-2001 titled Bhagmal and Ors. v. State
\nof Haryana, No. 539-SB-2001 titled Raj Singh @ Titu v.
\nState of Haryana and No. 658-SB-2001 Pankaj v. State of
\nHaryana as, in my opinion, all the four appeals can be
\ndisposed of by a common judgment.\n<\/p>\n
2. All these appeals have arised from one judgment
\ndated 23.2.2001 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Rewari, who
\nsame to the conclusion that all the appellants are guilty
\nfor the offences under Section 376(2)(g), 342, 323 and 506
\nread with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and vide
\norder dated 27.2.2001 Vikram Singh was sentenced for life
\nimprisonment with a fine of Rs. 5,000\/- and in default of
\npayment of fine to undergo RI for 2-1\/2 years, for the
\noffence and other six appellants, namely Bhagmal, Sukhbir
\n@ Sheru, Mehtab, Jai Parkash, Raj Singh @ Titu and Pankaj
\nwere sentence to undergo RI for 10 years each and to pay
\na fine of Rs. 4,000\/- each and in default of payment o
\nfine to further undergo RI for two years each, under
\nSection 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code. All the
\nappellants were further sentenced to undergo RI for one
\nyear each under each section for the offence punishable
\nunder Section 323 and 342 and RI for 2 years each under
\nSection 506 of the Indian Penal Code. All the sentences
\nwere ordered to run concurrently.\n<\/p>\n
3. The seven appellants, referred to above, were
\ncharge sheeted with the allegations that on 21.12.1998 at
\nabout 6.00 p.m. in the area of Rewari in furtherance of
\ntheir common intention they wrongfully confined Ramesh
\nDevi and thereby committed an offence punishable under
\nSection 342\/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Secondly, on the
\nsame date, time and place and in further of their common
\nintention they voluntarily caused simple hurt to said
\nRamesh Devi and thereby committed an offence punishable
\nunder Section 323\/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The third
\ncharge against the appellants was that on the same, date
\nand time and in furtherance of their common intention they
\nthreatened the prosecutrix to kill her and thereby
\nallegedly committed an offence punishable under Section
\n506\/34 of the Indian Penal Code. An the last charge
\nagainst them was that on the same date, time and place
\nthey committed gang rape with Ramesh Devi and thereby
\ncommitted an offence punishable under Section 376(2)(g) of
\nthe Indian Penal Code.\n<\/p>\n
4. Present is a case which has shaken our
\nconscience on going through the evidence and allegations
\nof the prosecution. Vikram Singh appellant is none else
\nbut the husband of Ramesh Devi. To what extent he can go
\nfor defaming his wife not only through himself but also
\nwith the assembly of his companions can be well judged on
\ngoing through the statements of the prosecutrix made
\nbefore the police and in the trial court and also before
\nthe Magistrate under Section 164 Cr.P.c. Ramesh Devi made
\na statement before SI\/SHO Baldev Singh of Police Station,
\nSadar Rewari in the company of her mother on 23.12.1998 at
\nabout 8.15 a.m. stating therein that she is a resident of
\nBerli Khurd. Her father explied in her childhood and
\nthereafter she started residing with her mother. She was
\nmarried with Vikram son of Mam Raj, caste Ahir, Resident
\nof Dahina, Police Station, Khol on 5.6.1994 according to
\nHindu rites and ceremonies and out of this wedlock she
\ngave birth to one male child, namely, Ankit, aged about 2
\nyears at the time of this incident. The prosecutrix was a
\nyoung girl of 20 years at that time and she further stated
\nthat she was living with her mother in the village for the
\nlast about 8\/10 months and she started serving as nurse in
\nVirendra Hospital, Rewari. On 21.12.1998 when she was
\nreturning to bus stand Rewari from the hospital, on the
\nway her husband Vikram Singh called her by name. At that
\ntime he was sitting in a while Maruti car bering
\nNo. DL-4C.3051 which was being driven by Titu alias Raj
\nSingh resident of Ladhuwas. her husband was sitting on
\nthe rear seat of the said car and one more person
\nbelonging to village Ladhuwas was also sitting in the car.
\nHer husband called her saying that he would drop her at
\nbus stand or Naiwala Chowk. She reposed confidence in her
\nhusband and sat in the car. She was made busy in
\nconversation and due to this reason her last bus missed.
\nHer husband told her that firstly they would take liquor
\nand then they would drop her. Her husband and his
\ncompanions became busy in taking liquor. It is alleged by
\nthe complainant that she was forced to consume Pepsi which
\nwas in a plastic bottle. Some intoxicant was mixed in the
\nPepsi and that was the reason that after 10\/15 minutes she
\nstarted feeling giddiness and her limbs were unable to
\nmove. Upon this her husband Vikram told to his companion
\nTitu that now she was fully intoxicated and they will take
\nher to Ladhuwas. Thereafter they took her to a house in
\nvillage Ladhuwas and she was in a position to identify the
\nsame. On reaching that house she observed that two
\npersons were already sleeping in the Chobara of the said
\nhouse. Her husband forcibly committed sexual intercourse
\nwith her in the Chobara and then he went out. Thereafter
\n(SIC) two persons, who were already sleeping in the Chobara,
\n(SIC) sexually assault her but she resisted and raised
\n(SIC) her cries, her husband told titu that on
\nhearing such cries villagers would attract to the spot.
\nHe suggested to take her to the well. Thereafter all the
\nfive persons forcibly took her in the car to the hut made
\nof gunny bags. In the hut three persons were already
\npresent, all those persons also committed rape with her
\nturn by turn and on her refusal they gave her beating and
\nmany photographs were taken by them in a forcibly manner.
\nThroughout the night they had been committing rape upon
\nher forcibly one after the other. On the following day at
\nabout 5.00 a.m. they dropped her near Mehendergarh Chowk,
\nRewari. Due to tiredness and pain she straightway went to
\nvillage Berli Khurd to her mother. On the day of
\nreporting, after she recovered, she accompanied by her
\nmother Giano Devi came to the police station for lodging
\nthe report, it was also stated by the prosecutrix that
\nthose persons while leaving her threatened that in case
\nshe tried to go to the police station for lodging the
\nreport, she would be killed. Also it was stated by the
\nprosecutrix that all those persons were young in age and
\nshe could identify them as and when they were produced
\nbefore her. It was further averred by the complainant
\nthat she left her clothes at home which she was wearing on
\n21.12.1998. Necessary action be taken against the
\nculprits. On the basis of that statement FIR Ex.PA was
\nrecorded, it was read over and explained to the
\nprosecutrix who signed the same in token of correctness
\nand was attested by SI Baldev Singh.\n<\/p>\n
5. PW18 SI Baldev Singh, after recording FIR Ex.PA
\ndeputed Constable Maya Rani and HC Munshi Ram to get the
\nprosecutrix medically examined at Civil Hospital, Rewari,
\nhe also recorded her supplementary statement on the same
\nday outside the police station. He also recorded the
\nstatement of the mother of the prosecutrix and thereafter
\nthe prosecutrix was sent to the hospital. After the
\nmedical examination of the prosecutrix, HC Munshi Ram
\nproduced the underwear and swabs taken by the doctor in a
\nsealed parcel to the Investigating Officer and those
\narticles were taken into possession vide recovery memo
\nEx.PL.\n<\/p>\n
6. On 24.12.1998, the prosecutrix, her mother and
\nother persons met the Investigating Officer at Naiwali
\nChowk, Rewari when the prosecutrix produced her suit and
\nSalwar and those were taken into possession vide recovery
\nmemo Ex.PM. thereafter the Investigating Officer visited
\nthe place of occurrence. He prepared rough site plan
\nEx.PZ. He also went to village Ladhuwas and prepared
\nrough site plan Ex.PAA of the Chobara of the house on the
\npointing out of Ramesh Devi. During the course of
\ninspection he took into possession a Dari from the hut in
\nvillage Ladhuwas and a Dupatta from the Chobara at village
\nSaharanwas vide recovery memos Ex.PK and PJ, respectively.
\nOn the same day he took into possession the car bearing
\nNo. DL-4D-3051 vide recovery memo Ex.PN.\n<\/p>\n
7. On 27.12.1998, the prosecutrix was produced
\nbefore the Magistrate for the purpose of recording her
\nstatement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Her statement was
\nrecorded in Hindi and the same can be described in the
\nfollowing manner:-\n<\/p>\n
  The prosecutrix stated that she has three
\nbrothers and sisters and she was married with Vikram about
\nfour years ago. It may be mentioned here that her
\nstatement was recorded on 27.12.1998. She was serving
\nwith Dr. Virender as Nurse. On 21.12.1998 at about 6
\nO’clock when she was returning to her house after doing
\nher job, a Maruti car on Garhi-Bolni road crossed her and
\nshe heard a noise coming form the Maruti car: Ramesh,
\nRamesh. She heard the noise but ignored the same. When
\nshe walked just 8\/10 feet the same voice came from the
\nMaruti car which was following her. Then she say that her
\nhusband Vikram was sitting in the car. He asked her to
\nsit in the car but she did not agree. Again he asked her
\nto sit in the car and this time she was taken forcibly in
\nthe car. Her husband Vikram asked her that he would drop
\nher at the bus stand. He further told that he was going
\nto his house and that she should accompany him. She asked
\nher husband to drop her at the bus stand and he may go in
\nthe car. She was not dropped at the bus stand. Her
\nhusband told her that she would be dropped at Naiwali.
\nUpon this the prosecutrix told her husband that Naiwali
\nhas come and she may be dropped there. He husband again
\ntold that first he would get some petrol in the car and
\nthen she would be dropped. After taking the petrol her
\nhusband did not drop her from the car. Two more persons
\nwere also sitting in the car. After taking petrol her
\nhusband asked Titu to return. They reached at Naiwali.
\nThe complainant enquired from the bus stand as to whether
\nthe last bus has gone or not. On coming to know that the
\nlast bus had already left, she requested her husband to
\ndrop her at her house. Her husband assured her that she
\nwould be left at her house but first of all he has to take
\nliquor. The prosecutrix requested her husband not to take
\nliquor and if he wants to take liquor he may take the same
\nat house. Her husband did not agree. He purchased liquor
\nand started taking the same. The liquor was consumed by
\nher husband and one other occupant of the car. Then her
\nhusband told her to take Pepsi. The complainant was
\nreluctant to take the Pepsi but her husband asked her
\ncompanion Sunda (Bhagmal) to offer Pepsi to the
\ncomplainant. When Sunda offered Pepsi, she refused.
\nThereafter they entered inside the car and asked titu (Raj
\nSingh) to start the car. There was only road at that
\nplace and there was no shop or house. Then her husband
\nagain asked the complainant to take Pepsi. She refused
\nand upon this her husband gave her 4\/5 slaps and compelled
\nher to take Pepsi, otherwise she will be beaten. Due to
\nthe fear she took Pepsi. After about 10 minutes of taking
\nPepsi she was in such a condition that she could not
\nstand, her husband asked Titu alias Raj Singh that she
\nshould be taken to Ladhuwas. When she heard the name of
\nLadhuwas, she asked her husband that she be taken to her
\nhouse and why she was being taken to Ladhuwas. Upon this
\nher husband said sorry and asked his companion Titu alias
\nRaj Singh to take the complainant to Berli. After
\ncovering some distance she say that they were taking her
\nto some other place instead of her house. She made a
\nnoise and enquired from them as to where she was being
\ntaken. Her husband told her that they were taking her to
\nBerli. She was again beaten. At about 8.00 p.m. she
\nobserved that the car has turned towards village
\nSaharanwas. Those persons took her to a Chobara and asked
\nMehtab to open the door. It was opened and her husband
\ntook her in the Chobara and she say inside the Chobara
\nMehtab, who opened the door, and one more person were
\npresent. Thereafter her husband asked Mehtab who is the
\nsecond person, upon which Mehtab told that he was his
\nfriend Pankaj. thereafter her husband asked Mehtab to go
\nout of the Chobara and her husband started removing her
\nclothes. When the complainant objected to her husband
\nthat as to what he was doing in the presence of other
\npersons, her husband told her that the other man was in
\nsound sleep. Her husband removed her clothes and
\ncommitted sexual intercourse with her and then he left the
\nroom. Then other persons were called inside the room. It
\nwas stated by the complainant in her statement under
\nSection 164 Cr.P.C. that her husband got committed rape
\nupon her by other persons. She further complained that as
\nand when she wanted to resist the sexual intercourse of
\nother persons, she used to be beaten. On one side her
\nhusband was standing and on the other side Titu alias was
\nstanding. As and when she tried to cry, Titu started
\nbeating her with his belt and her husband used to give her
\nkicks. She stated that inside the Chobara five persons,
\nnamely, Pankaj, Mehtab, Titu @ Raj Singh, Vikram Singh and
\nSunda alias Bhagmal committed rape with her one after the
\nother. She further stated that when they tried to commit
\nrape upon her second time, she made a noise. On this her
\nhusband asked his four companions to take her at the well.
\nHer husband enquired from Mehtab, who will be present on
\nthe well and upon this Mehtab replied that Sheru and
\nChotia might be available there. Further, the prosecutrix
\ndeposed that she was in naked condition and she was
\nbrought to the well by covering herself with a Dari. When
\nshe was raped, the same Dari was being used in the
\nChobara. Her husband and his companions all put her in
\nthe car and took her to the well. There was only one hut.
\nNo well was there. Two more persons met there. Those two
\npersons also committed rape upon her one after the other.
\nThe names of Sheru and Chotu became known to her as they
\nwere calling their names. The complainant further alleged
\nthat one person was taking her photographs and all the
\naforesaid persons committed rape during the night with her
\nand also gave her beating. As and when she wanted to
\nobstruct she was given more beating. So much so her urine
\nfell on the Darri which was put on a cot. At about 4.00
\na.m. they threatened her with dire consequences. She
\nrequested her husband and his companions not to kill her
\nbut all the persons continuously threatened her with dire
\nconsequences. When she cried again, one of them told that
\nshe may be killed lest she may not report the matter to
\nthe police. Upon this the complainant told them that she
\nwould not go anywhere nor she would narrate the incident
\nto anybody. On this condition they allowed her to sit in
\nthe car after covering with the same Dari and then they
\ngave her clothes for wearing and she wore her clothes in
\nthe car. Thereafter these persons left her at Narnaul
\nroad at about 5.00 a.m. At that time there was darkness.
\nShe sat near the road under a tree. After some time she
\nslept there. At about 7.00 a.m. she woke up. Thereafter
\nshe stood near the road and saw same persons coming in the
\ncar. Vikram, Sunda and Titu were the occupants of the
\ncar. She again became afraid of them. Thereafter she
\nwent to Berli by bus and after reaching there she narrated
\nthe whole story to her mother. On that day she was
\nprovided with heat by her mother. Finally the prosecutrix
\nstated before the Magistrate that her health became too
\nweak to walk. On 23.12.1998 she along with her mother
\nwent to the police station in the evening and narrated the
\nentire story in the police station. The statement Ex.PB
\nwas read over and explained to the prosecutrix by Shri
\nNazar Singh, Judicial magistrate Ist Class, Rewari and was
\nsigned by the prosecutrix.\n<\/p>\n
8. The Investigating Officer SI Baldev Singh
\narrested Raj Singh, Sukhbir @ Sheru, Jai Parkash, Mehtab
\nSingh, Bhagmal @ Sunda and they were medically examined
\nabout their capability to perform sexual intercourse.
\nAfter their medical examination the doctor handed over to
\nthe Investigating Officer 5 underwears which were being
\nworn by the five accused and those were taken into
\npossession vide memo Ex.PU. From the possession of Raj
\nSingh 38 negatives were recovered vide memo Ex.PT.\n<\/p>\n
9. On 27.12.1998, PW3 Dr. P.D. Mehra medico legally
\nexamined Bhagmal alias Sunda son of Banwari and issued
\ncertificate Ex.PD on police request Ex.PD\/1 to the effect
\nthat this person was capable of performing sexual
\nintercourse. On the same day he also examined Jai Parkash
\nand vide report Ex.PE declared him fit to perform sexual
\nintercourse. The opinion was given on police request
\nEx.PE\/1. Further, this very doctor examined Raj Singh @
\nTitu and as per his opinion Ex.PF he was also fit to
\nperform sexual intercourse. He further examined Mehtab
\nson of Bachan Singh appellant and opined vide Ex.PG that
\nthere was nothing to suggest that he was not capable to
\nperform sexual intercourse. Still further Dr. Mehra medico
\nlegally examined Sukhbir alias Sheru and he was also
\ndeclared fit to perform sexual intercourse vide opinion
\nEx.PH which was given on request Ex.PH\/1. The doctor also
\ntook into possession the samples of the public hair besides
\nunderwears of these five persons.\n<\/p>\n
10. On 19.1.1999 PW2 Dr. Karan Singh along with
\nDr. O.P. Dawas and Dr. Kawar Singh examined Pankaj son of
\nAsha Nand and gave opinion Ex.PC that he was fit to
\nperform sexual intercourse.\n<\/p>\n
11. Finally the sealed parcels of the clothes of
\nRamesh Devi, slides, Swabs, pubic hair, Darri, Salwar,
\nlady shirt and underwears of the accused were sent to the
\noffice of the director, Forensic Science Laboratory, who
\nvide report Ex.PX opined that human semen was there on the
\nDarri, underwears but the semen could not be detected on
\nthe slixes, swabs, pubic hairs of the prosecutrix, Salwar
\nand the lady shirt.\n<\/p>\n
12. During the course of investigation the
\nnegatives which were recovered from the possession of Titu
\nalias Raj Singh were got developed and those are Exs.P1 to
\nP37.\n<\/p>\n
13. On completion of the investigation of the case
\nthe present appellants were challaned in the court of Area
\nMagistrate under Sections 376, 342, 506, 323 read with
\nSection 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned
\nMagistrate supplied the copies of the documents to the
\naccused as required under the law and vide commitment
\norder dated 4.5.1999 committed the appellants to the Court
\nof Session.\n<\/p>\n
14. In order to prove the charges, the prosecution
\nexamined PW1 Ramesh Devi, whose statement shall be dealt
\nby us in detail. Further, the prosecution examined PW2
\nDr. Karan Singh, who on 19.1.1999 medico legally examined
\nPankaj appellant and declared him fit to perform sexual
\nintercourse. Five appellants, namely, Bhagmal alias
\nSunda, Jai Parkash, Raj Singh @ Titu, Mehtab and Sukhbir
\nalias Sheru were medically examined by PW3 Dr. P.D. Mehra
\nand they were declared fit to perform sexual intercourse.
\nPW4 is Ram Kumar who deposed that on 24.12.1998 he had
\ngone to village Saharanwas with the police in connection
\nwith the investigation of this case and from the Chobara
\nat village Saharanwas a Dupatta was taken into possession
\nby the police vide memo Ex.PJ. This dupatta was
\nidentified by the prosecutrix who was also with the police
\nat that time. From there they went to village Ladhuwas
\nand from a hut a Dari was taken into possession by the
\npolice vide memo Ex.PK and the Dari was identified by
\nRamesh Devi. The police also showed Salwar and Jamphar to
\nthe prosecutrix and the same were identified by her. PW5
\nin Nazar Singh, HCS, who deposed that on 27.12.1998 he was
\nposted as Judicial magistrate Ist Class, Rewari and on
\nthat day he recorded the statement of the prosecutrix
\nwhich is Ex.PB and it was so recorded on police request
\nEx.PD\/1. He passed orders Ex.PB\/2 and PB\/3 regarding the
\ncompliance of Section 164 Cr.P.C. PW6 is HC Munsi Ram who
\ndeposed that on 23.12.1998 he accompanied the prosecutrix
\nto Civil Hospital, Rewari along with lady Constable Maya
\nRani and the prosecutrix was medically examined there.
\nAfter her medical examination one parcel of underwear of
\nthe prosecutrix and one parcel of swabs sealed with the
\nseal of the doctor were handed over to him with the copy
\nof the M.L.R. and one envelope and he handed over these
\narticles to SI\/SHO Baldev Singh, who took these articles
\ninto possession vide memo Ex.PL. PW7 is ASI Devi Lal, who
\ndeposed that on 24.12.1998 he joined the investigation of
\nthis case with SI Baldev Singh and in his presence the
\nprosecutrix Ramesh Devi handed over her Salwar and Jamphar
\nto the SHO at Naiwali Chowk, Rewari and those were taken
\ninto possession vide memo Ex.PM. Thereafter he along with
\nthe police party went to village Saharanwas and from a
\nChobara one Dupatta was taken into possession in the
\npresence of Ramesh Devi and it was taken into possession
\nvide memo Ex.PJ. Thereafter they went to village Ladhuwas
\nand from a hut a Darri was taken into possession vide memo
\nEx.PK. From Ladhuvas a Maruti car bearing registration
\nNo. DL-4CD-3051 was taken into possession, which was lying
\nparked in front of the house of Raj Singh alias Titu, vide
\nmemo Ex.PN. PW8 is Sanwat Singh, Advocate, District
\nCourts, Rewari, who deposed that under the orders of the
\nAddl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rewari from the negatives,
\nwhich were recovered in this case, positives were got
\ndeveloped from Astha laboratory, Rewari in his presence
\nand that of ASI Anil and complainant Ramesh Devi. The
\ndeveloped photographs were taken into possession vide memo
\nEx.PO. The photographs are Exs.P1 to P37. PW9 HC Inder
\nSingh and PW10 Constable Abdul Karim tendered their
\naffidavits Exs.PP and PQ respectively. PW11 is HC Hazari
\nLal, who deposed that on 23.12.1998 he delivered the
\nspecial report of this case to the Ilaqua Magistrate at his
\nresidence. PW12 Constable Naresh Kumar deposed that he
\nprepared scaled site plan Ex.PR of the place of occurrence
\non the pointing out of Ramesh Devi. PW13 Rajpal Singh,
\nrevenue Patwari deposed that he prepared site plan Ex.PS
\non the pointing out of Ramesh Devi. PW14 ASI Mahender
\nSingh deposed that he partly investigated this case. On
\n18.4.1999 he arrested Vikram Singh and got his medically
\nexamined. PW15 is ASI Anil Kumar, who deposed that on
\n27.12.1998 five accused were arrested by SI Baldev Singh.
\n38 negatives were recovered from the possession of Raj
\nSingh and those were taken into possession vide memo
\nEx.PT. He got the five accused medically examined. After
\nthe medical examination he handed over the sealed parcel
\nof the underwears which were taken into possession vide
\nmemo Ex.PU. On 18.1.1999, he arrested Pankaj in the area
\nof bus stand Rewari and he was also medically examined on
\nthe same day. On 9.2.1999 the negative photographs were
\ngot developed from Aggarwal Colour Lab, Rewari on the
\norders of the learned Addl. Chief Judicial magistrate,
\nRewari and the same were taken into possession vide memo
\nEx.PO, attested by Sanwat Singh, Advocate and Ramesh Devi,
\nprosecutrix. The photographs are Exs.P1 to P37 and
\nnegatives are Exs.P38 to P77. The witness further deposed
\nthat two negatives could not be developed. PW16 is
\nDr. Sunita Garg, who medico legally examined Ramesh Devi
\nprosecutrix and deposed as follows:-\n<\/p>\n
 ” Examination <\/p>\n
  Breast well developed. Public & axillary
\nhair well developed. Few public hair near labia
\nmajora and matted, cut and sent for semen
\nanalysis. Stain present on underwear and sent
\nfor semen analysis.\n<\/p>\n
  INJURIES  <\/p>\n
 1.A. contusion of 13 x 4 cm present on
\nanterolateral aspect of left thigh 2 inch
\nabove left knee joint and of bluish colour.\n<\/p>\n
 2. Semicircular abrasion of size 5 x .1 cm
\npresent on right cheek 5 cm away from right
\nala of nose, seems to be teeth mark.\n<\/p>\n
 3. Semicircular abrasion of 3 x 0.2 cm present
\non right side of face 4 cm below injury No. 2,
\nseems to be teeth mark.\n<\/p>\n
 4. Abrasion of 0.5 x 0.2 cm present on right
\nside of face 4 cm away form lateral angle of
\nmouth.\n<\/p>\n
 5. Swelling of 3 cm x 3 cm present on ulnar side
\nof left forearm in middle. Tenderness was
\npresent. Advised X-ray. Left forearm AP
\nview and lat. view.\n<\/p>\n
 6. Also complaining of pain in the middle of
\nleft arm.\n<\/p>\n
 7. Complaining of pain on right side of back in
\nscapular area.\n<\/p>\n
  LOCAL EXAMINATION     <\/p>\n
  No injury mark over labia majora, perineum,
\nbreasts. Few bruises were present of size 2 cm
\nx 1 cm, 4 in number on labia minora near post
\nfourchette. Hymen is ruptured and replaced by
\ncarunculae myrtiformes. Vagina admit two
\nfingers.\n<\/p>\n
 L.M.P. 1.12.1998   <\/p>\n
  P.V. EXAMINATION  <\/p>\n
  Two swabs taken from vagina for semen
\nanalysis, slide made form vaginal secretion for
\nsemen analysis. For age verification referred
\nto radiologist.\n<\/p>\n
  IMPRESSION   <\/p>\n
 Final report will be given after receiving
\nreport of analysis from FSL, Madhuban, Karnal.\n<\/p>\n
 After going through the report of FSL,
\nKarnal, in my opinion the patient was subjected
\nto sexual intercourse. Ex.PV is the photo copy
\nof MLR, I have brought the original MLR which
\nis in my hand and it bears my signature. I had
\nexamined Ramesh Devi on police application
\nEx.PV\/1.\n<\/p>\n
  HANDED OVER TO POLICE   <\/p>\n
 1. A copy of MLR-S.G\/3\/98 dated 23.12.1998.\n<\/p>\n
 2. An envelope bearing 5 seal containing
\nforwarding letter, copy of MLR sample of
\nseal addressed to FSL, Madhuban.\n<\/p>\n
 3. A pulanda bearing 5 seals containing
\nunderwear of patient.\n<\/p>\n
 4. A box bearing 7 seals containing two test
\ntubes with vaginal swabs, 1 test tube with
\npubic cut hair and two slides addressed to
\nFSL, madhuban for semen analysis.\n<\/p>\n
 5. Two samples of seal.”\n<\/p>\n
15. PW17 Vijender Singh, whose version before the
\npolice was that he developed negatives, but at the trial
\nstage this witness did not support the case of the
\nprosecution. PW18 is Investigating Officer SI Baldev
\nSingh. Finally, the prosecution tendered into evidence
\nthe report of the Chemical Examiner and closed the case.\n<\/p>\n
16. The statements of the accused were recorded
\nunder Section 313 Cr.P.C. and all the incriminating
\ncircumstances appearing in the prosecution evidence were
\nput to them. Their defence before the trial court was
\nthat they have been falsely implicated in this case.\n<\/p>\n
17. When called upon to enter into defence, accused
\nexamined DW1 Lal Singh and DW2 Daulat Ram and closed the
\ncase.\n<\/p>\n
18. The learned trial court believed the story of
\nthe prosecution and convicted and sentenced the appellants
\nin the manner as stated above and aggrieved by their
\nconviction and sentence the present appeals.\n<\/p>\n
19. We have heard Mr. Gorakh Nath, Mr. T.P.S. Mann
\nand Mr. P.R. Yadav, Advocates on behalf of the appellants,
\nMr. Sanjay Vashist, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana on
\nbehalf of the State and with their assistance have gone
\nthrough the records of the case.\n<\/p>\n
20. The entire case of the prosecution hinges upon
\nthe statement of PW1 Ramesh Devi, who is none else but the
\nwife of appellant Vikram Singh. After going through the
\nstatement of this witness we are of the opinion that this
\ngang rape has been committed not only by Vikram Singh who
\nis none else but the husband of the prosecutrix but this
\nman was so cruel to his wife that he even abetted and
\ninvited his companies to commit rape upon his wife with
\nwhom this gentleman had some strained relations. In order
\nto put the lady into disrepute Vikram Singh not only
\nkidnapped her forcibly against her will but also made her
\nsedate. She was taken to a Chobara by three persons at
\nthe first instance where two more persons joined and all
\nthe five persons committed rape upon her one after the
\nother. So much so she was severely treated. She was made
\nnaked. In order to put her into shame her naked
\nphotographs and some of the photographs in comprising
\nposition were taken. From there she was taken to a hut.
\nTwo more persons joined and again the prosecutrix became
\nthe victim of sexual lust at the instance of the
\nappellants.\n<\/p>\n
21. Before we deal with the case law as well as the
\ncontentions raised by the learned counsel for the parties,
\nit will be proper for us first to make a reference of the
\nsubstantive statement of Ramesh Devi who appeared in the
\ntrial court as PW1. We have already reproduced above the
\ncontents of the FIR and the statement under Section 164
\nCr.P.C. Of course there is some improvements in the
\nstatement of the prosecutrix but we are convinced that the
\ngenesis of the occurrence have not been broken and she has
\nnot concealed anything from her statement under Section
\n164 Cr.P.C. from which a benefit can be granted to any of
\nthe appellants.\n<\/p>\n
22. While appearing as PW1 Ramesh Devi deposed that
\nin the month of December, 1998 she was working as a nurse
\nin the hospital of Dr. Narender situated at Garhi-Bolni
\nroad, Rewari. On 21.12.1998 at about 6.00 p.m., after
\ndoing her duty in the said hospital, she was going
\ntowards bus stand for going to her village. On
\nGarhi-Bolni road she passed by a Maruti car. She heard
\nthe calls Ramesh, Ramesh from that car but she ignored the
\nsame. After covering about 8\/10 steps the same Maruti car
\nagain reached by her side and again she heard the calls of
\nRamesh. She looked into the car and found that
\nher husband was sitting in the said car, who asked her to
\nsit in the car. She refused to do so. He caught hold of
\nher hand and made her sit in the car and told her that he
\nwas going to Berli Khurd and would drop her there. On the
\nrequest of her husband she boarded the car only for going
\nto the bus stand. But he did not drop her at the bus
\nstand and told her to drop at Naiwali Chowk. Also he did
\nnot drop her at Naiwali. He took petrol in the car and
\nagain came to Naiwali and by that time the last bus for
\nher village had left. While sitting in the car she
\nconfirmed from one person whether the last bus for Berli
\nKhurd had left or not. Thereafter she told to her husband
\nto drop her at Berli Khurd, but her husband told to the
\n_contrary by saying that first of all he would take liquor
\nand thereafter she would be dropped at Berli Khurd, the
\nprosecutrix further stated on oath that she asked her
\nhusband not to take liquor but despite that he took wine
\nin the car. Sunda and Titu were also with him. All these
\nthree persons were correctly identified by the prosecutrix
\nin the court, the prosecutrix further deposed in the
\ncourt that liquor was also taken by Sunda. Pepsi was
\noffered to her by Raj Singh @ Titu and Bhagmal alias
\nSunda, but she refused to take the same. She further
\nstated that Vikram also insisted her to take Pepsi and she
\nrefused to take the same. Thereafter on the asking of
\nVikram, Raj singh, who was driving the car at that time
\ntook the car towards Narnual Chowk at a place where there
\nwas no crowd. There Vikram gave her slaps and forced her
\nto take Pepsi. After taking Pepsi she started feeling
\ngiddy and lost her senses, but was hearing everything.
\nThen Vikram asked Raj singh @ Titu to take her to village
\nLadhuwas, she objected. Thereafter Vikram said that I
\nwill be taken to Berli Khurd. She told Vikram that they
\nwere not going to Berli. Again he gave her a few slaps
\nand she was thereafter taken to a Chobara at village
\nSaharanwas by them. While outside the Chobara Vikram said
\n“Mehtab open the Chobara.” The witness also correctly
\nidentified Mehtab in the court. It has further come in
\nthe statement of the prosecutrix that thereafter vikram
\ntook her inside the Chobara. One more person was sleeping
\nin the Chobara. On being asked by vikram, Mehtab told him
\nthat  person sleeping in the Chobara was Pankaj and he
\nwas also correctly identified by the prosecutrix in the
\ncourt. Vikram asked Mehtab to go out. Thereafter she was
\nraped by Vikram against her wishes after removing her
\nclothes. During that time Pankaj had remained in that
\nroom. Thereafter she was raped by Mehtab and during that
\nperiod she was beaten by Vikram with kicks and Titu also
\nhit her with the belt whenever she raised alarm.
\nThereafter she was raped by Sunda and at that time titu
\nand Vikram gave her beating when she tried to raise alarm.
\nWhen Pankaj raped her, Titu and vikram played the same
\nrole which was played by them earlier. While in the room
\ntitu was taking her photographs. Thereafter Vikram
\nsuggested that she should e taken to the well, and at
\nthat time Mehtab said that Sukhi and Chhote shall be
\nthere. Thereafter she was taken to the well. The witness
\ncorrectly identified Sukhi (Sukhbir and Chhoti (Jai
\nParkash). She further deposed that last of all she was
\nraped by Titu (Raj Singh) and photograph were taken by
\nTitu while she was being raped by Chhotia, Sukhi and
\nSunda, the witness also deposed that she was raped in a
\nhut situated in the field. In fact, there was no well
\nthough during the conversation it was said that she was
\ngoing to be taken to the well. She further stated that
\nthe names of the remaining accused except vikram were not
\nknown to her and she came to know their names during their
\nconversation. She further deposed that accused had also
\nthreatened to kill her, but on the asking of one of them
\nthey did not kill her and obtained an oral assurance from
\nher to the effect that she will not narrate the  matter of
\nthe police or anybody else. The witness further stated
\nthat she was left by the accused on the next morning at
\n5.00  a.m. at Naiwali Chowk, then she went to a place
\nunder a tree near Narnaul Chowk and slept for some time.
\nShe got up around 7.00 a.m. and again came to the road
\nand saw that Sunda, Titu and vikram were roaming in the
\ncar. She was frightened from them and again went to the
\nfield. Thereafter she took a bus for her village from the
\nplace near Narnaul Chowk and visited her village and
\nnarrated the whole story to her mother. On that day she
\nwas unwell because of the gang rape. The matter was
\nreported to the police on the next day. She visited the
\nPolice Station, Rewari at 9.00 a.m. and at that time her
\nmother was with her. She further deposed that she was the
\nauthor of FIR Ex. PA. She further stated that she have
\nseen the photographs which were taken by titu. In
\nphotographs Exs. P1, P2, P7, P9, P10, P13, P21, P22, P28,
\nP33 and P37 Sunda alias Bhagmal is appearing. Photographs
\nExs. P5, P6, P14, P15, P17, P25 and P18 pertain to Mehtab.
\nIn photographs Exs. P24, P27, P35 Chhotia alias Jai Parkash
\nhas been shown. She further stated that in photograph
\nEx. P30 accused Titu (Raj sing) and Sunda (Bhagmal) have
\nbeen shown. She further deposed that she was
\nmedicolegally examined and Chobara and Jhopri were shown
\nto the police by her. Finally, she deposed that she was
\nraped in the Chobara and Jhopri and she made her statement
\nunder Section 164 Cr.P.C. It has also come in the
\nstatement of the prosecutrix that on 24.12.1998 she handed
\nover the clothes which she was wearing on the day of
\noccurrence to the police.\n<\/p>\n
23. The statement of the prosecutrix is
\ncorroborated by the medical evidence of lady Dr. Sunita
\nGarg (PW16). On going through the statement of Dr. Sunita
\nGarg, we are left in no doubt that the victim was
\nsubjected to cruelty and force. There was a contusion of
\n13 cm x 4 cm on the left high 2 inch above the left knee
\njoint. The doctor also noticed some semicircular abrasion
\nof 5 cm x 1 cm on the right side of the face, besides
\nswelling on the left forearm. Also the injured was
\ncomplaining of pain in the middle of the left arm and
\nright side of the back. The doctor further deposed that
\nthere were few bruises of the size of 2 cm x 1 cm, four in
\nnumber on labia minora near post and hymen was ruptured.
\nFinally, the doctor gave the impression after the receipt
\nof the report of the F.S.L. that the prosecutrix was
\nsubjected to sexual intercourse and she proved this fact
\nvide report Ex. PV, which is M.L.R. of the prosecutrix.\n<\/p>\n
24. So far as position of law while dealing such
\nlike cases is concerned, it has been amply explained by
\nthe Hon’ble Supreme Court in the famous case State of
\nPunjab v. Gurmit Singh and Ors AIR<\/a> 1996 SC 1393.
\nSeveral aspects of such like cases have been discussed by
\nthe Hon’ble Supreme Court and in para No.7 of this
\njudgment it has been observed that in sexual offences
\ndelay in the lodging of the FIR can be due to variety of
\nreasons particularly the reluctance of the prosecutrix of
\nher family members to go to the police and complain about
\nthe incident which concerns the reputation of the
\nprosecutrix and the honour of her family. It is only
\nafter giving it a cool thought that a complaint of sexual
\noffence is generally lodge. Even if there is some delay
\nin lodging FIR in respect of offence of rape, if it is
\nproperly explained and the explanation is natural in the
\nfacts and circumstances of the case, such delay would not
\nmatter. Reverting to the facts in hand, the present
\noccurrence took place on 21.12.1998. It started from 6.00
\np.m. and continued during the night. On 22.12.1998 the
\nvictim was desert. She was to return to the house of
\nher mother. It is a case where seven persons including
\nthe husband of the prosecutrix committed rape one after
\nthe other and in these circumstances we can well imagine
\nthe condition of the victim when seven persons had tried
\nto fulfil their sexual lust. Moreover, the husband of the
\nprosecutrix was directly and mainly involved in this case.
\nThe relations, of course, between the husband and wife were
\nstrained. In these circumstances, the prosecutrix might
\nhave taken some time firstly to recover herself from the
\nshock and then physically and then she must have taken
\ninto confidence her mother about the lodging of the FIR.
\nTherefore, we are inclined to hold that there is no delay
\nin the lodging of FIR in the present case.\n<\/p>\n
25. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gurmit Singh’s
\nCase (supra) has again laid down very vital guidelines in
\npara No.7 of the judgment as to how the testimony of a
\nprosecutrix is to be appreciated, it was observed that
\ngirl, in a tradition bound non-permissive society in
\nIndia, would be extremely reluctant even to admit that any
\nincident which is likely to reflect upon her chastity had
\noccurrence, being conscious of the danger of being
\nostracized by the society or being looked down by the
\nsociety. Further it was observed that the Courts must,
\nwhile evaluating evidence, remain alive to the fact that
\nin a case of rape, no self-respecting woman would come
\nforward in a Court just to make a humiliating statement
\nagainst her honour such as is involved in the commission
\nof rape on her. In cases involving sexual molestation,
\nsupposed considerations which have no material effect on
\nthe veracity of the prosecution case or even discrepancies
\nin the statement of the prosecutrix should not, unless the
\ndiscrepancies are such which are of fatal nature, be
\nallowed to throw out an otherwise reliable prosecution
\ncase. The inherent bashfulness of the females and the
\ntendency to conceal outrage of sexual aggression are
\nfactors which the Courts should not overlook. Further,
\nthe Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that the testimony of
\nvictim in cases of sexual offences is vital and unless
\nthere are compelling reasons which necessitate looking for
\ncorroboration of her statement, the Courts should find no
\ndifficultly to act on the testimony of a victim of sexual
\nassault alone to convict an accused where her testimony
\ninspires confidence and is found to be reliable. Seeking
\ncorroboration of her statement before relying upon the
\nsame, as a rule, in such cases amounts to adding insult to
\ninjury. Why should the evidence of a girl or a woman who
\ncomplains of rape or sexual molestation, be viewed with
\ndoubt, disbelief or suspicion? The Court while
\nappreciating the evidence of a prosecutrix may look for
\nsome assurance of her statement to satisfy its judicial
\nconscience, since she is a witness who is interested in
\nthe outcome of the charge levelled by her, but there is no
\nrequirement of law to insist upon corroboration of her
\nstatement to base conviction of an accused. The evidence
\nof a victim of sexual assault stands almost at par with
\nthe evidence of an injured witness and to an extent is
\neven more reliable. Just as a witness who has sustained
\nsome injury in the occurrence, which is not found to be
\nself inflicted, is considered to be a good witness in the
\nsense that he is least likely to shield the real culprit,
\nthe evidence of a victim of a sexual offence is entitled
\nto great weight, absence of corroboration notwithstanding.
\ncorroborative evidence is not an imperative component of
\njudicial credence in every case of rape. Corroboration as
\na condition for judicial reliance on the testimony of the
\nprosecutrix is not a requirement of law but a guidance of
\nprudence under given circumstances. It must not be
\noverlooked that a woman or a girl subjected to sexual
\nassault is not an accomplice to the crime but is a victim
\nof another person’s lust and it is improper and
\nundesirable to test her evidence with a certain amount of
\nsuspicion, treating her as it she were an accomplice.
\nInferences have to be drawn from a given set of facts and
\ncircumstances with realistic diversity and not dead
\nuniformity lest that type of rigidity in the shape of rule
\nof law is introduced through a new form of testimonial
\ntyranny making justice a casualty. Courts cannot cling to
\na fossil formula and insist upon corroboration even if,
\ntaken as a whole, the case spoken of by the victim of sex
\ncrime strikes the judicial mind as probable.\n<\/p>\n
26. Finally, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in para
\nNo. 20 of the judgment was pleased to observe as follows:-\n<\/p>\n
  Of late, crime against women in general and
\nrape in particular is one the increase. It is
\nan irony that while we are celebrating women’s
\nrights in all spheres, we show little or no
\nconcern for her honour. It is a sad reflection
\non the attitude of indifference of the society
\ntowards the violation of human dignity of the
\nvictims of sex crimes. We must remember that a
\nrapist not only violates the victim’s privacy
\nand personal integrity, but inevitably causes
\nserious phycological as well as physical harm
\nin the process. Rape is not merely a physical
\nassault it is often destructive of the whole
\npersonality of the victim. A murderer destroys
\nthe physical body of his victim, a rapist
\ndegrades the very should of the helpless
\nfemale. The Courts, therefore, shoulder a
\ngreat responsibility while trying an accused on
\ncharges of rape, they must deal with such
\ncases with utmost sensitivity, the Courts
\nshould examine the broader probabilities of a
\ncase and not get swayed by minor contradictions
\nor insignificant discrepancies in the statement
\nof the prosecutrix, which are not of a fatal
\nnature, to throw out an otherwise reliable
\nprosecution case. If evidence of the
\nprosecutrix inspires confidence, it must be
\nrelied upon without seeking corroboration of
\nher statement in material particulars, if for
\nsome reason the Court finds it difficult to
\nplace implicit reliance on her testimony, it
\nmay look for evidence which may lend assurance
\nto her testimony, short of corroboration
\nrequired in the case of an accomplice, the
\ntestimony of the prosecutrix must be
\nappreciated in the background of the entire
\ncase and the trial Court must be alive to its
\nresponsibility and be sensitive while dealing
\nwith cases involving sexual molestations.”\n<\/p>\n
27. To protect the honour of a woman the
\nlegislature in its wisdom has also introduced the
\nprovisions of Section 114A of the Indian evidence Act,
\nwhich runs as follows:-\n<\/p>\n
  “In a prosecution for rape under Clause (a) or
\nClause (b) or Clause (c) or Clause (d) or
\nClause (e) or Clause (g) of Sub-section (2) of
\nSection 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45
\nof 1860) where sexual intercourse by the
\naccused is proved and the question is whether
\nit was without the consent of the woman alleged
\nto have been raped and she states in her
\nevidence before the court that she did not
\nconsent, the court shall presume that she did
\nnot consent.”\n<\/p>\n
28. Thus the reading of the above provisions would
\nshow that the moment it is established that the victim was
\nsubjected to sexual intercourse and she alleges positively
\nthat she was raped, the law courts shall drawn an inference
\nand shall presume for the benefit of the prosecution that
\nshe was subjected to rape and she was not a consenting
\nparty.\n<\/p>\n
29. Reverting to the statement of the prosecutrix,
\nit is established that the right from the very act
\nresisted in the company of others when her husband asked
\nher to come inside the car. She resisted even the taking
\nof soft drink. In fact, the intention of the husband was
\nbad. He wanted to take a revenge of the separation. He
\ntook liquor and took her own wife to a chobara where two
\npersons were already present and one after the other they
\nraped her. Not only this, some photographs were taken by
\nRaj Singh, From there she was taken to a hut. She was
\nmade naked and was brutally treated. She was given slaps.
\nViolence was used. All  this was so said by the
\nprosecutrix and her statement finds corroboration from the
\nmedical evidence and other circumstantial evidence which
\nhas been collected by the prosecution. The Dari which was
\ncollected during the course of investigation also
\nestablishes that there was sexual intercourse. Semen fell
\non the Darri and human semen was found by the  Forensic
\nScience Laboratory.\n<\/p>\n
30. With regard to the presumption under Section
\n114A of the Evidence Act, this point has been dealt by the
\nHon’ble Supreme Court in Prem alias Ballu v. The State of
\nHaryana<\/a> 2003(1) RCR (Criminal) 237 and it was observed by
\nthe Bench after relying upon State of Punjab v. Gurmit
\nSingh<\/a> 1996 (1) Recent CR 533 that the Court shall presume
\nthat the victim did not consent when the victim makes a
\nstatement before the Court that she did not consent. Also
\nit was observed that mere absence of marks of external
\ninjury do not negate the prosecution case. To supplement
\nthe view of the Hon’ble Supreme court reliance can also be
\nplaced on State of Karnataka v. Krsihnappa 2000(2) RCR
\n(Criminal) 459 and State of Rajasthan v. N.K.<\/a> – the
\naccused 2000(2) RCR (Criminal) 471. In Sat Pal v. State
\nof Punjab<\/a> 1997(1) Recent CR 93 this Court took the view
\nthat even if it is assumed that the prosecutrix was a lady
\nof loose moral character, but it does not give a licence
\nto the accused to have forcible sexual intercourse with
\nher against her consent. Again it was observed in this
\nvery judgment that once the statement of the prosecutrix
\nis found to be reliable which contained true account of
\noccurrence of rape, it is not necessary for the
\nprosecution to lead corroborative evidence of medical
\nofficer regarding commission of rape.\n<\/p>\n
31. In Gurmit Singh’s case (supra), the Hon’ble
\nSupreme court made observations that when the accused
\npushed the prosecutrix inside the car and gave threats and
\nin such a situation if the prosecutrix does not raise any
\nnoise, the statement of the prosecutrix should not be
\ndiscredited because in such a situation the poor helpless
\ngirl will not be able to cut the ice when the accused were
\nout and out to outrage the modesty of the woman.\n<\/p>\n
32. The learned counsel for the appellants
\nsubmitted that the entire case of the prosecution is
\ndoubtful and highly improbable. It was submitted that the
\nconduct of the prosecutrix was such that it does not
\ninspire confidence. She did not raise any noise when she
\nwas being kidnapped and was being taken to the Chobara.
\nIn fact, she was connived with some of the accused. She
\nwanted to get rid of from her husband Vikram Singh who has
\nbeen falsely implicated in this case. He submitted that
\nthe prosecutrix might be colluding with Raj Singh from
\nwhose possession allegedly the negatives were recovered by
\nthe police. After the arrest of Raj Singh the police
\ndeveloped a case against the remaining appellants. The
\nlearned counsel submitted that even in the statements
\nunder Section 313 Cr.P.C., which have been recorded by the
\nlearned trial Court, all the incriminating circumstances
\nappearing in the prosecution evidence were not put to the
\naccused and more pertinently with regard to the capability
\nof the accused to perform sexual intercourse.\n<\/p>\n
33. The submissions made by the learned counsel for
\nthe appellants, in our opinion, are totally devoid of any
\nmerit. In spite of the fact that the prosecutrix had
\nstrained relations with her husband, she would not tear
\nher abdomen at the cost of her own honour and chastity.
\nShe was a young girl of 20 years and irrespective of the
\nfact that some strained relations were there with her
\nhusband, she would not go to the extent not only naming
\nher husband but also the other friends of her husband.\n<\/p>\n
34. The present occurrence can be divided into
\nthree parts. Firstly, that the victim was picked up from
\nthe way of the hospital and she was thrown inside the car.
\nThen she was taken to a Chobara where she was raped by
\nfive persons and thereafter she was taken to the hut where
\nagain she was raped by two more persons. During the
\ncourse of rape some photographs were taken. People may
\nlie but the circumstances may not. It is established on
\nthe record that the negatives were got developed into
\nphotographs Exs.P1 to P37. Prosecutrix Ramesh Devi has
\ndeposed in the examination-in-chief that in photographs
\nExs. P1, P2, P7, P9, P10, P13, P21, P22, P28, P33 and P37
\nBhagmal figures. These photographs depict that Bhagmal was
\nin compromising position with the prosecutrix.
\nPhotographs Ex. P22 is of such a posture which would show
\nthe helplessness on the part of the victim when she is
\nbeing compelled to lick the private part of Bhagmal
\nThese photographs do not reflect the consent. It is not
\nbelievable that the prosecutrix would give consent for
\nsuch an act of sexual intercourse in the presence of
\nothers. The learned counsel for the appellants have no
\nanswer to the photograph Ex. P3 when the victim is being
\ncompelled to smoke a biri. This shows the height of
\ndepravity. Similarly, photograph Ex. P16 she is being
\ncompelled to suck Hukka. From her expression it appears
\nthat she was weeping as she was beseeching to the accused
\nnot to be so cruel. Things do not rest here. In
\nphotographs Exs. P4, P19 and P20 she is being compelled to
\nstand with her stands at the back so that she not be
\nable to conceal her private organs. In photographs Ex. P26
\nphotographs she is beseeching with her folded hands to the
\naccused not to expose her in that fashion. Even in
\nphotograph Ex. P8 the poor lady is trying to cover has
\nchastity by wrapping her body with the help of quilt.
\nIn photographs Exs. P14, P15, P23, P25 and P27 she is
\nvirtually weeping though she had subjected herself to
\nsexual intercourse but definitely her consent and
\nwillingness was absent. To what extent she was helpless
\nwhen seven persons were out and out to exploit the modesty
\nand honour of the lady. We must confess that it has even
\nbecome difficult for us to explain in proper words about
\nthe maltreatment and sexual explitation given to the
\nlady. We will not be wrong if we say that the appellants
\nwere wolves. They had no conscious to give respect to the
\nmodesty of a woman. She was treated like a chattel.
\nAfter losing her honour before seven persons how she is
\nsurviving can only be answered by the lady herself.\n<\/p>\n
35. Even if we hold that some questions under
\nSection 313 Cr.P.C. have not been properly but to the
\naccused, still it is not a case of setting aside the
\nacquitted or remand as no prejudice has been caused to any
\nof the appellants and the entire prosecution evidence has
\nbeen recorded in their presence. Each one of the
\nappellants knew that he was medically examined by the
\ndoctor regarding his potency. The appellants were given
\nfull opportunity to cross-examine the doctors. We have no
\nreason to disbelieve the statement of the prosecutrix
\nirrespective of the fact that her mother has not been
\nexamined by the prosecution in the trial Court. Here is a
\ncase where the prosecutrix can forget to mention few facts
\neither in her police statement or in the statement under
\nSection 164 Cr.P.C. She might have made some improvements
\nhere or there even in her substantive statement made
\nbefore the trial Court, but by and large the statement of
\nthe prosecutrix inspires confidence. We are convinced
\nthat she was picked up at the first instance by three
\npersons including her husband. Then she was taken to a
\nChobara where two more persons joined them. Again she was
\ntaken to a hut. She was raped, maltreated and beaten in
\nthe chobara. Photographs were taken. In the hut
\nphotographs were again taken by Raj Singh alias Titu and
\nwhen developed, the developed prints told a sad story of
\nthe matter.\n<\/p>\n
36. It was a case of gang rape in which husband of
\nthe prosecutrix was also involved. A rapist not only
\nviolates the victim’s privacy but also her personal
\nintegrity and such person does not deserve any sympathy of
\nlaw or society. The honour of a woman has to be
\nprotected. This is the general senses of the society.\n<\/p>\n
37. Be that as it may, we are concerned with the
\nlegal aspects of the case which are that Ramesh Devi is
\nthe victim of sexual assault, her statement inspires
\nconfidence, though her statement does not require
\ncorroboration as a matter of law but by way of abundant
\ncaution it is corroborated by the medical evidenced as
\nwell as by the circumstantial evidence, the identity in
\nthis case is also not doubtful. In the FIR three persons
\nwere named. The supplementary statement of the lady was
\nalso recorded. The accused have not made any application
\nto claim the identification from the lady. She has no axe
\nto grind against an of the appellants. Of course, she had
\nsome strained relations with her husband but still it is
\nnot established on the record that she will go to that
\nextent in implicating her husband and his friends.\n<\/p>\n
38. In the finality, we do not see any merit in
\nthese appeals and dismiss the same.\n<\/p>\n
39. Let intimation about the dismissal of these
\nappeal by sent to the jail authorities and the concerned
\nChief Judicial Magistrate.\n<\/p>\n
40. Before we part with this judgment, we are
\nobserving that the photographs Exs. P1 to P37 and the
\nnegatives Exs. P38 to P77 have been sealed by us in an
\nenvelope under the seal of the Court and the envelope have
\nalso been signed by us so that these photographs and
\nnegatives of the harassed woman may not fall in wrong
\nhands. The Registry will ensure that  the records of these
\ncases will be kept in a double seal and will be produced
\nin case of necessity before the Hon’ble Supreme Court as
\nand when requisitioned.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Vikram Singh Son Of Shri Mam Raj vs The State Of Haryana on 6 February, 2003 Author: R Anand Bench: R Anand, V Singh JUDGMENT R.L. Anand, J. 1. By this judgment we dispose of four criminal appeals No. 583-DB-2001 titled Vikram Singh v. State of Haryana No. 373-SB-2001 titled Bhagmal and […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-113343","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nVikram Singh Son Of Shri Mam Raj vs The State Of Haryana on 6 February, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-singh-son-of-shri-mam-raj-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-6-february-2003\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Vikram Singh Son Of Shri Mam Raj vs The State Of Haryana on 6 February, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-singh-son-of-shri-mam-raj-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-6-february-2003\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2003-02-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-12-07T19:26:23+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"48 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vikram-singh-son-of-shri-mam-raj-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-6-february-2003#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vikram-singh-son-of-shri-mam-raj-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-6-february-2003\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Vikram Singh Son Of Shri Mam Raj vs The State Of Haryana on 6 February, 2003\",\"datePublished\":\"2003-02-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-12-07T19:26:23+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vikram-singh-son-of-shri-mam-raj-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-6-february-2003\"},\"wordCount\":9538,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vikram-singh-son-of-shri-mam-raj-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-6-february-2003#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vikram-singh-son-of-shri-mam-raj-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-6-february-2003\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vikram-singh-son-of-shri-mam-raj-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-6-february-2003\",\"name\":\"Vikram Singh Son Of Shri Mam Raj vs The State Of Haryana on 6 February, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2003-02-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-12-07T19:26:23+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vikram-singh-son-of-shri-mam-raj-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-6-february-2003#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vikram-singh-son-of-shri-mam-raj-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-6-february-2003\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vikram-singh-son-of-shri-mam-raj-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-6-february-2003#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Vikram Singh Son Of Shri Mam Raj vs The State Of Haryana on 6 February, 2003\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Vikram Singh Son Of Shri Mam Raj vs The State Of Haryana on 6 February, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-singh-son-of-shri-mam-raj-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-6-february-2003","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Vikram Singh Son Of Shri Mam Raj vs The State Of Haryana on 6 February, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-singh-son-of-shri-mam-raj-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-6-february-2003","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2003-02-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-12-07T19:26:23+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"48 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-singh-son-of-shri-mam-raj-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-6-february-2003#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-singh-son-of-shri-mam-raj-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-6-february-2003"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Vikram Singh Son Of Shri Mam Raj vs The State Of Haryana on 6 February, 2003","datePublished":"2003-02-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-12-07T19:26:23+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-singh-son-of-shri-mam-raj-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-6-february-2003"},"wordCount":9538,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-singh-son-of-shri-mam-raj-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-6-february-2003#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-singh-son-of-shri-mam-raj-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-6-february-2003","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-singh-son-of-shri-mam-raj-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-6-february-2003","name":"Vikram Singh Son Of Shri Mam Raj vs The State Of Haryana on 6 February, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2003-02-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-12-07T19:26:23+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-singh-son-of-shri-mam-raj-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-6-february-2003#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-singh-son-of-shri-mam-raj-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-6-february-2003"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-singh-son-of-shri-mam-raj-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-6-february-2003#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Vikram Singh Son Of Shri Mam Raj vs The State Of Haryana on 6 February, 2003"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/113343","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=113343"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/113343\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=113343"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=113343"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=113343"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}