{"id":230078,"date":"2009-01-12T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-01-11T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/satbir-alias-satta-vs-state-of-haryana-on-12-january-2009"},"modified":"2018-08-03T07:56:04","modified_gmt":"2018-08-03T02:26:04","slug":"satbir-alias-satta-vs-state-of-haryana-on-12-january-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/satbir-alias-satta-vs-state-of-haryana-on-12-january-2009","title":{"rendered":"Satbir Alias Satta vs State Of Haryana on 12 January, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Satbir Alias Satta vs State Of Haryana on 12 January, 2009<\/div>\n
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 923-DB OF 2004                          -1-\n\nIN THE HIGH            COURT        OF     PUNJAB   AND   HARYANA     AT\nCHANDIGARH.\n\n\n\n\n             DATE OF DECISION: January 12, 2009\n\n                     Parties Name\n\nSatbir alias Satta\n                                         ...APPELLANT.\n\n       VERSUS\nState of Haryana\n                                          ...RESPONDENT\n\n\n\n\nCORAM:       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH\n             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JORA SINGH\n\n\n\nPRESENT: Mr. H.S.Gill, Senior Advocate,\n         with Mr. Vivek Goel,\n         Advocate, for the appellant.\n\n             Ms. Archana Sharma, Advocate, for\n             appellant Billu alias Bhagwan Dayal\n             in Cr. A. No. 71-DB of 2005.\n\n             Mr. K.S.Godara, D.A.G., Haryana;\n\n\nJASBIR SINGH, J.\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
             This judgment will dispose of two Criminal Appeal No. 923-<\/p>\n
DB of 2004 titled as Satbir alias Satta v. State of Haryana and Criminal<\/p>\n
Appeal No.<\/a> 71-DB of 2005, titled as Billu alias Bhagwan Dayal v. State of<\/p>\n
Haryana as these arise out of a judgment and order dated October 20,, 2004<\/p>\n
and October 21, 2004, respectively. For dictation of this order, facts are
\n CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 923-DB OF 2004                             -2-<\/span><\/p>\n
being taken from Criminal Appeal No. 923-DB of 2004.\n<\/p>\n
            Satbir alias Satta, appellant, Billu alias Bhagwan Dayal<\/p>\n
(appellant in the connected appeal), Om Parkash, Naresh Kumar, Dayal<\/p>\n
Chand and one Shamsher alias Kala were put to trial to face prosecution<\/p>\n
under Sections 342, 376(2)(g) and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. It was<\/p>\n
allegation against them that they, in conspiracy with each other, had<\/p>\n
wrongly confined Promila alias Nahni, the prosecutrix, and committed rape<\/p>\n
upon her without her consent. Vide judgment and order under challenge, the<\/p>\n
appellant and Billu alias Bhagwan Dayal were convicted and sentenced<\/p>\n
under Sections 342 and 376(2)(g) IPC. However, the others were acquitted.<\/p>\n
It is necessary to mention here that Shamsher alias Kala had committed<\/p>\n
suicide before challan was put in Court for trial.\n<\/p>\n
            Process of criminal law was set in motion at the instance of<\/p>\n
Risal alias Vishal (PW8), brother of the prosecutrix. On his statement FIR<\/p>\n
Ex. PH\/1 was recorded in Police Station Sampla on April 30, 2002, at 2.05<\/p>\n
PM.\n<\/p>\n
            Prosecution case, as noted by the trial Court in para No. 1 of the<\/p>\n
judgment under challenge, reads thus:\n<\/p>\n
            “Prosecution case is that on 30.4.2004 S.I. Sohan Lal PW15<\/p>\n
            along with head constable Rajbir Singh No. 1000, Head<\/p>\n
            Constable Jai Bhagwan No. 371 and Constable Budh Singh No.<\/p>\n
            749 was present in Main Bazar, Sampla in connection with<\/p>\n
            patrolling, when Risal Singh PW8 met him and gave written<\/p>\n
            report Ex. PH to the effect that they have two houses, one<\/p>\n
            inside the village and another outside in ‘Bani’ (forest). His<\/p>\n
            sister aged about 27 years (prosecutrix) who is examined as
\n CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 923-DB OF 2004                         -3-<\/span><\/p>\n
         PW16 and whose name is being withheld) is mentally retarded.<\/p>\n
         She is married and mother of two children. The previous day<\/p>\n
         dated 29.4.2004, at about 7 p.m., as usual, she had gone from<\/p>\n
         the house inside the village, to the house in ‘Bani’, but did not<\/p>\n
         return, so, they searched her through out the night. At about 6<\/p>\n
         a.m. when he and his sister’s husband Mahinder PW9 son of<\/p>\n
         Pokhar, reached near village High School, Mahabir PW10, son<\/p>\n
         of Jai Lal, met them. On being appraised, Mahabir told them<\/p>\n
         that in the previous night around 8 p.m. when he was coming<\/p>\n
         towards his house, after closing his shop, near the school, he<\/p>\n
         had seen Shamsher alias Kala (since deceased) taking the<\/p>\n
         prosecutrix, on his scooter No. DL95C\/3094, towards his hotel<\/p>\n
         at the By-pass. On this, he (Risal Singh) and his brother in law<\/p>\n
         Mahinder, reached the hotel and inside a room found Shamsher<\/p>\n
         alias Kala, raping the prosecutrix. Accused Satbir son of Ram<\/p>\n
         Chander, resident of Bhaproda and accused Billu son of<\/p>\n
         Bhagwan Dass, resident of Dighal, were sitting on a nearby cot.<\/p>\n
         On seeing them there, all the three, ran away after giving them<\/p>\n
         a push. Later on, on asking, the prosecutrix appraised them that<\/p>\n
         said two persons, who were sitting on the nearby cot, had also<\/p>\n
         raped her in the night. Thereafter he and his sister’s husband<\/p>\n
         Mahinder brought her to the house. They called back other<\/p>\n
         family members who had gone to search her. It is further<\/p>\n
         mentioned by Risal Singh in his report Ex. PH that they are<\/p>\n
         running a tea vend and accused Shamsher alias Kala, Satbir and<\/p>\n
         Billu used to come to his tea vend, as such he knew them.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\n CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 923-DB OF 2004                             -4-<\/span><\/p>\n
            After registration of an FIR, the Investigating Officer Sohan<\/p>\n
Lal, SI (PW15) referred the prosecutrix, (PW16), for medical examination,<\/p>\n
which was conducted by Dr. Sunita Dhania (PW1) on April 30, 2004, at<\/p>\n
2.30 PM in Civil Hospital, Sampla. As per MLR( Ex. PA), above said<\/p>\n
witness noted bruise on the right cheek of the prosecutrix. The Doctor<\/p>\n
further opined that possibility of sexual intercourse could not be ruled out.<\/p>\n
She also took vaginal swabs of the prosecutrix and handed over the same to<\/p>\n
the police in a sealed packet along with other sealed packets containing<\/p>\n
wearing clothes of the prosecutrix for semen examination. Above said<\/p>\n
material was sent for testing and as per report Ex. PB of the Forensic<\/p>\n
Science Laboratory, human semen was detected on both the vaginal swabs<\/p>\n
and Salwar Ex. P1 but not on shirt Ex. P2 and Chunni Ex. P3.         In the<\/p>\n
meantime, Investigating Officer went to the place of occurrence, got<\/p>\n
prepared rough site plan and also took into possession scooter, which<\/p>\n
allegedly was used in committing the crime. Investigation was verified by<\/p>\n
the Deputy Superintendent of Police concerned. On that very day, appellant<\/p>\n
and Billu alias Bhagwan Dayal were arrested. They were sent for their<\/p>\n
medical examination, which was conducted by Dr. Rajiv Narwal (PW2) at<\/p>\n
9.42 PM and 8.37 PM respectively. As per Doctor’s opinion, there was<\/p>\n
nothing suggestive that they were not capable to perform the sexual<\/p>\n
intercourse. No smegma was found present on the penis of Billu alias<\/p>\n
Bhagwan Dayal but smegma was found present on the penis of the<\/p>\n
appellant. Wearing clothes of the above said accused were sent for chemical<\/p>\n
examination, as per report Ex. PB of the Forensic Science Laboratory,<\/p>\n
human semen was detected on clothes of the accused. However, on
\n CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 923-DB OF 2004                              -5-<\/span><\/p>\n
serological analysis, semen grouping was found inconclusive. The<\/p>\n
Investigating Officer recorded statements of other witnesses. On May 4,<\/p>\n
2004, SI Ram Singh (PW14) recorded statement of PW11 Mohinder, who<\/p>\n
stated facts regarding conspiracy hatched by the accused to kidnap and rape<\/p>\n
the prosecutrix. After recording his statement offence under Section 120-B<\/p>\n
IPC was also added in the FIR. On May 6, 2004, accused Om Parkash,<\/p>\n
Dayal Chand and Naresh were also arrested. On May 4, 2004, accused<\/p>\n
Suresh alias Kala committed suicide by hanging. Inquest report regarding<\/p>\n
his dead body was prepared by SI Sumer Singh (PW12). After completing<\/p>\n
investigation, the Investigating Officer filed final report in Court for trial.<\/p>\n
The accused were charge-sheeted to which they pleaded not guilty and<\/p>\n
claimed trial.\n<\/p>\n
             The prosecution, to prove its case, examined as many as 16<\/p>\n
witnesses and also brought on record documentary evidence. On conclusion<\/p>\n
of prosecution evidence, statements of all the accused were recorded under<\/p>\n
Section 313 Cr.P.C. Incriminating material existing on record was put to<\/p>\n
them. They denied the same, claimed innocence and false implication.<\/p>\n
Appellant Satbir took up a defence that he was arrested at about 9.00\/10.00<\/p>\n
AM, when he was standing on Delhi Bypass, Sampla, near his Maruti car.<\/p>\n
Many persons including one Karne (DW1) was also standing at that place.<\/p>\n
In defence, the appellant also examined Karan Singh (Dw1) and Deepak<\/p>\n
Atri (DW2). After hearing counsel for the parties and perusal of record, the<\/p>\n
trial Court convicted the appellant and Billu alias Bhagwan Dayal.<\/p>\n
However, others were acquitted. Hence these appeals.<\/p>\n
             Shri H.S.Gill, Senior Advocate, counsel for the appellant, has<\/p>\n
vehemently contended that the trial Court was not justified in convicting
\n CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 923-DB OF 2004                             -6-<\/span><\/p>\n
and sentencing the appellants – accused. By making reference to the<\/p>\n
statements made by PW8, PW9 and PW16, he argued that on material<\/p>\n
points, deposition of above said witnesses was contradictory to each other.<\/p>\n
The trial Court has misread their statements, which resulted into wrong<\/p>\n
conviction of the appellants. From the statements of above said witnesses,<\/p>\n
he has indicated that their deposition is contradictory so far as to who was<\/p>\n
committing rape upon the prosecutrix when eye witnesses reached at the<\/p>\n
spot, what was the situation at the spot, how many people were available<\/p>\n
and which accused ran away from the place of occurrence? Counsel further<\/p>\n
argued that even as per prosecution version, the prosecutrix went missing in<\/p>\n
the evening of April 29, 2004. Police Station is available in the village.<\/p>\n
Despite that no report was made. Alleged rape was committed at 6 AM on<\/p>\n
April 30, 2004. FIR was recorded only at 2.05 PM. The prosecution has<\/p>\n
failed to explain delay in lodging the FIR. By stating as above, counsel<\/p>\n
argued that intervening period was used by the prosecution in concocting a<\/p>\n
false story against the appellants and others. He further argued that the oral<\/p>\n
evidence is not supported by the medical evidence on record. At the time of<\/p>\n
medical examination of the appellant, Dr. Rajiv Narwal (PW2) found that<\/p>\n
smegma was      present on the penis of the appellant, which negatives<\/p>\n
commission of rape by him. By making reference to the statement of<\/p>\n
Investigating Officer, he stated that the complainant instead of making<\/p>\n
statement to the police under Section 161 Cr.P.C. in this case, preferred to<\/p>\n
file written application, which he got typed outside the Police Station to get<\/p>\n
the FIR recorded. This aspect goes to show that the FIR was recorded after<\/p>\n
discussion with the police. He further laid challenge to the statements made<\/p>\n
by Mahabir Singh(PW10), who has stated that he had seen Shamsher
\n CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 923-DB OF 2004                             -7-<\/span><\/p>\n
accused taking away the prosecutrix on a scooter and she was struggling.<\/p>\n
Counsel argued that the conduct of this witness in not reporting the matter<\/p>\n
to the family members of the prosecutrix shows that this witness was<\/p>\n
introduced by the prosecution lateron. Counsel further argued that Mohinder<\/p>\n
(PW11) was not a truthful witness. This witness has deposed regarding<\/p>\n
conspiracy hatched by the accused to kidnap and rape the prosecutrix, two<\/p>\n
days prior to the date of occurrence. Counsel argued that by not intimating<\/p>\n
family members of the prosecutrix, conduct of this witness becomes<\/p>\n
unreliable. He further argued that statement of the prosecutrix was not<\/p>\n
recorded as per law. At the time of recording her deposition, without<\/p>\n
adopting the procedure, she was allowed to take help of her father and<\/p>\n
doctor. There was no certificate on the file to show that she was of unsound<\/p>\n
mind. He prayed that the appeal be allowed and the appellants – accused be<\/p>\n
acquitted of the charges framed against them.\n<\/p>\n
            Prayer made by counsel for the appellants has been opposed by<\/p>\n
counsel for the State, who argued that the statement made by the prosecutrix<\/p>\n
(PW16) is alone sufficient to uphold conviction and sentence awarded to the<\/p>\n
appellants. He, by making reference to the prosecution witnesses, argued<\/p>\n
that the prosecution was successful in bringing home guilt of the appellants<\/p>\n
and further that it was an eye witness account, the defence has failed to<\/p>\n
shatter testimony of the prosecution witnesses despite lengthy cross-<\/p>\n
examination. By stating that delay in recording the FIR has sufficiently been<\/p>\n
explained, he prayed that the discrepancies indicated by the defence counsel<\/p>\n
in statements of the prosecution witnesses are immaterial, as such be<\/p>\n
ignored. He prayed that the appeal having no substance be dismissed.<\/p>\n
            After hearing counsel for the parties, this Court is of the
\n CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 923-DB OF 2004                            -8-<\/span><\/p>\n
opinion that counsel for the appellant was successful in creating doubt<\/p>\n
regarding involvement of the appellants in the alleged crime. No doubt in<\/p>\n
normal circumstances, if deposition made by the prosecutrix is truthful, it<\/p>\n
alone is sufficient to convict an accused. In the present case, eye witness<\/p>\n
account has also been projected by the prosecution. To know whether<\/p>\n
deposition made by the prosecution witnesses is truthful or not, we have to<\/p>\n
analyse carefully the statements made by them. As per case of the<\/p>\n
prosecution, the prosecutrix is of low intelligence. She went missing from<\/p>\n
her house, , in the evening on April 29, 2004. Police Station is situated in<\/p>\n
the village. However, despite opportunity available, no intimation was sent<\/p>\n
to the police. As per prosecution, the family members continued to search<\/p>\n
for the prosecutrix during night intervening April 29 & 30, 2004. PW8 Risal<\/p>\n
(complainant) has said in his deposition that after detection of the crime,<\/p>\n
he, his brother-in-law Mohinder, husband of the prosecutrix, and the<\/p>\n
prosecutrix reached their house at about 7.00\/8.00 AM on April 30, 2004.<\/p>\n
No explanation has been given, in deposition of any of the witnesses, as to<\/p>\n
why matter was not reported to the police immediately. FIR was got lodged<\/p>\n
at 2.05 PM , that too by making a written application, which was got typed<\/p>\n
in a shop from outside the Police Station. Above said facts clearly indicate<\/p>\n
that the prosecution has failed to explain delay in lodging the FIR. It<\/p>\n
appears that the intervening period was used in consultations to involve the<\/p>\n
appellants in the false case.\n<\/p>\n
             Perusal of depositions made by PW8 Risal, PW9 Mohinder ,<\/p>\n
husband of the prosecutrix, and PW16, the prosecutrix, reveals that they<\/p>\n
have contradicted each other on material points. PW8 has specifically stated<\/p>\n
that he along with PW9 Mohinder had seen Shamsher Singh committing
\n CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 923-DB OF 2004                             -9-<\/span><\/p>\n
rape upon the prosecutrix at about 6 AM on April 30, 2008, in a hotel<\/p>\n
(Dhaba) room, the appellant and one Kala were sitting on a cot nearby. This<\/p>\n
witness has further stated that outside the room in question, in a veranda,<\/p>\n
7\/8 persons were sleeping. He further said that he had seen six accused<\/p>\n
named in the FIR at the spot. All the accused ran away from the spot after<\/p>\n
pushing them aside. He has specifically stated that an accused, who was<\/p>\n
committing the rape, ran away from the spot without putting on his clothes.<\/p>\n
He has further deposed that Mohinder (PW9) was with him when he lodged<\/p>\n
the FIR. This witness has shown his ignorance as to where and when the<\/p>\n
appellant and Billu accused were arrested. This witness has also failed to<\/p>\n
state as to in which direction the prosecutrix and the accused were lying<\/p>\n
when they reached at the spot. This witness has not specifically mentioned<\/p>\n
name of Billu alias Bhagwan Dayal as a person, who had committed rape<\/p>\n
upon the prosecutrix. As against this, PW9 Mohinder Singh , husband of the<\/p>\n
prosecutrix, has specifically stated that when he along with Risal (PW8)<\/p>\n
reached at the spot, they found appellant Satbir committing rape upon the<\/p>\n
prosecutrix and two other persons were sitting in the Veranda. All the three<\/p>\n
persons ran away from the spot. Upon questioning, the prosecutrix disclosed<\/p>\n
that Satbir, Billu, Naresh and Om Parkash had also committed rape upon<\/p>\n
her. This witness has further stated that Kala and Satbir were arrested by the<\/p>\n
police from the hotel, i.e., the place of occurrence and other accused ran<\/p>\n
away. He has further stated that the person who was committing rape was<\/p>\n
also completely naked. The above said person first put on his clothes and<\/p>\n
then ran away. This witness has not named          any    accused, who was<\/p>\n
committing rape upon the prosecutrix. He has further stated that he did not<\/p>\n
accompany PW8 Risal to the Police Station when FIR was recorded.
\n CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 923-DB OF 2004                              -10-<\/span><\/p>\n
Application Ex. PH was not written by Risal Singh.\n<\/p>\n
            The prosecutrix , in her deposition, had stated that when in the<\/p>\n
morning, Risal and Mohinder reached at the spot, she was being raped by<\/p>\n
two persons, who thereafter ran away. She could identify the persons who<\/p>\n
raped her. When she was asked to identify the accused, who were sitting in<\/p>\n
Court, she pointed towards Lilu, Dayal Chand and Satbir as the persons who<\/p>\n
had committed rape upon her. In the next breath, she stated that rape was<\/p>\n
committed upon her by Billu and Santa also. She has specifically admitted<\/p>\n
that names of the accused persons were told to her by the police. In her<\/p>\n
cross-examination, she has specifically pointed towards Billu, who was<\/p>\n
committing rape upon her when Risal and Mohinder reached at the spot.<\/p>\n
She has further stated that when she was raped in a hotel room, many<\/p>\n
persons were available and they had seen the occurrence. She has further<\/p>\n
stated that Risal is working in Delhi for the last 1- \u00bd – 2 years, which fact<\/p>\n
was specifically denied by PW8 Risal. This witness has further stated that<\/p>\n
she was earlier also raped by the accused and others. She has admitted<\/p>\n
relationship of PW10 Mahabir and PW11 Mohinder with her family. Above<\/p>\n
said facts clearly show that on material points, all the three witnesses are<\/p>\n
deposing contrary to each other. This fact alone is sufficient to cast doubt in<\/p>\n
the mind of the Court, regarding participation of the appellants in the<\/p>\n
alleged crime.\n<\/p>\n
            Further submission of Shri Gill that medical evidence does not<\/p>\n
corroborate participation of appellant Satbir in the alleged crime appears to<\/p>\n
be justified. After his arrest, appellant was medico-legally examined on<\/p>\n
April 30, 2004, at 8.37 PM by Dr. Rajiv Narwal (PW2), who has opined as<\/p>\n
under:\n<\/p>\n
 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 923-DB OF 2004                             -11-<\/span><\/p>\n
            “Local Examination: Pubic hair metted. Penis size 6.5 cm in<\/p>\n
            unerrected stage. Prepuce retracted and smegma present. No<\/p>\n
            fresh injury mark on his person. Secondary sexually character<\/p>\n
            were normal.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            Opinion: There was nothing suggestive of that the person was<\/p>\n
            brought by police cannot perform sexual intercourse.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            Shri Gill has argued that the very presence of smegma on the<\/p>\n
penis of the appellant negatives allegation of rape against him. To say so, he<\/p>\n
has relied upon observations made in Modi’s Medical Jurisprudence , 21st<\/p>\n
Edition, page 384, which reads as under:\n<\/p>\n
            “Presence of Smegma as Negative Rape.-1. In July, 1921, Mt.<\/p>\n
            Ramdevi, aged 15 years, made a report that three young men,<\/p>\n
            viz, Panchu, Debi and Jodha had committed rape on her. They<\/p>\n
            were arrested and sent immediately to Modi for examination.<\/p>\n
            None of them had any mark of injury on their genitals or<\/p>\n
            anywhere else on their bodies. The first two had smegma on the<\/p>\n
            glans penis covered by the foreskin; this proved that they could<\/p>\n
            not have had sexual intercourse at least during the last twenty-<\/p>\n
            four hours. The girl was also examined and found to have been<\/p>\n
            used to sexual intercourse, inasmuch as her hymen had old<\/p>\n
            lacerations. She had no mark of injury to her private parts or to<\/p>\n
            any other part of her body. The men were released.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            Their lordships of the Supreme Court dealing with a similar<\/p>\n
situation in Sadashiv Ramrao Hadbe v. State of Maharashtra and<\/a> another,
\n CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 923-DB OF 2004                               -12-<\/span><\/p>\n
(2006) 10 Supreme Court Cases 92, has observed as under:<\/p>\n
             “8. It may also be noticed that the appellant was medically<\/p>\n
             examined on the same day by PW 10. In his evidence, he stated<\/p>\n
             that smegma was present around the corona glandis. He further<\/p>\n
             deposed that his examination negatived sexual intercourse and<\/p>\n
             for collection of smegma around corona glandis a period of 24<\/p>\n
             hours is required. This scientific evidence also did not support<\/p>\n
             the prosecution. Had there been a vigorous sexual act as alleged<\/p>\n
             by the prosecutrix there could not have been the presence of<\/p>\n
             smegma on his private part.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             Similarly their lordships of the Supreme Court in Aman Kumar<\/p>\n
and another v. State of Haryana, (2004) 4 Supreme Court Cases 379, opined<\/p>\n
that “in rape case, if the gland of the male organs is covered by smegma, it<\/p>\n
negatives the possibility of recent complete penetration. If the accused is not<\/p>\n
curcumsized, the existence of smegma around the corona gland is proof<\/p>\n
against penetration since it is rubbed of during the act. The smegma<\/p>\n
accumulates if no bath is taken within 24 hours. To the same effect is the<\/p>\n
opinion of their lordships of the Supreme Court in State of Karnataka v.<\/p>\n
Mahabaleshwar Gourya Naik,<\/a> 1992 Supp (3) Supreme Court Cases 179. It is<\/p>\n
also evident from the record that no injury was found present on the private<\/p>\n
parts of the appellant and another convict, namely, Billu. On the person of<\/p>\n
the prosecutrix, only one bluish bruise was found at her cheek, which was<\/p>\n
not a teeth bite. It is not in dispute that age of the prosecutrix was 27 years.<\/p>\n
She was married and having two children. As per report of the Forensic<\/p>\n
Science Laboratory, semen was detected on the clothes of the prosecutrix
\n CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 923-DB OF 2004                             -13-<\/span><\/p>\n
and   the accused, which were taken into possession. However, as per<\/p>\n
Serological report, the report with regard to analysis of semen group<\/p>\n
remains inconclusive.\n<\/p>\n
            The prosecutrix had admitted her relationship with Mahabir<\/p>\n
(PW10), who has stated that he had seen Shamsher Singh taking away the<\/p>\n
prosecutrix in the evening of April 29, 2004 and she was struggling. Very<\/p>\n
surprisingly, despite being closely related to the family of the prosecutrix,<\/p>\n
he did not intimate the above said fact to the family members of the<\/p>\n
prosecutrix. As per admitted facts, Mahabir is residing within a reasonable<\/p>\n
distance. The prosecutrix has also admitted that Mohinder (PW11) is his<\/p>\n
uncle. Above said witness has deposed regarding conspiracy hatched by the<\/p>\n
appellant and other accused to kidnap and rape the prosecutrix on April 28,<\/p>\n
2004. This witness was residing at a close distance to the house of the<\/p>\n
prosectrix. However, he also failed to intimate the prosecutrix or any other<\/p>\n
family member with regard to above mentioned conspiracy. PW10 Mahabir<\/p>\n
and PW11 Mohinder have denied their relationship with the family of the<\/p>\n
prosecutrix whereas the prosecutrix has stated to the contrary. This fact<\/p>\n
shows that they were not truthful witnesses.\n<\/p>\n
            Contention of Shri Gill that statement of the prosecutrix was<\/p>\n
not recorded, as per law, also appears to be justified. PW8 and PW9 both<\/p>\n
have stated that the prosecutrix was mentally disturbed from the childhood.<\/p>\n
They have further stated that she was not undergoing any medication at the<\/p>\n
time of recording her evidence. No certificate from a competent doctor was<\/p>\n
produced to prove the above said fact. The Court below without insisting<\/p>\n
upon medical opinion believed that the prosecutrix was of unsound mind<\/p>\n
and hard of hearing. She was allowed to get assistance from her father and
\n CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 923-DB OF 2004                            -14-<\/span><\/p>\n
doctor at the time of recording her statement. Both the persons mentioned<\/p>\n
above were not administered oath. Perusal of statement made by the<\/p>\n
prosecutrix shows that most of the questions she has replied in a very<\/p>\n
intelligent manner and some she has omitted. The appellant has produced<\/p>\n
evidence in his defence. It was his contention that he was picked up from<\/p>\n
Delhi Byepass, Sampla, and falsely involved in this case. His version has<\/p>\n
been authenticated by DW1 Karan Singh.\n<\/p>\n
            In view of facts, mentioned above, this Court is of the opinion<\/p>\n
that statement made by the prosecutrix does not inspire confidence and is<\/p>\n
not supported by any corroborative evidence. Under similar circumstances,<\/p>\n
their lordships of the Supreme Court in Sadashiv Ramrao Hadbe’s case<\/p>\n
(Supra) has observed as under:\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
            “9. It is true that in a rape case the accused could be convicted<\/p>\n
            on the sole testimony of the prosecutrix, if it is capable of<\/p>\n
            inspiring confidence in the mind of the Court. If the version<\/p>\n
            given by the prosecutrix is unsupported by any medical<\/p>\n
            evidence or the whole surround circumstances are highly<\/p>\n
            improbable and belie the case set up by the proseuctrix, the<\/p>\n
            court shall not act on the solitary evidence of the prosecutrix.<\/p>\n
            The courts shall be extremely careful in accepting the sole<\/p>\n
            testimony of the<\/p>\n
            prosecutrix when the entire case is improbable and unlikely to<\/p>\n
            happen. “<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            In view of facts, mentioned above, we allow these appeals, set
\n CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 923-DB OF 2004                        -15-<\/span><\/p>\n
aside impugned judgment and order and acquit both the appellants of the<\/p>\n
charges framed against them.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                               (JASBIR SINGH)
\n                                                    JUDGE<\/p>\n
                                               (JORA SINGH)
\n                                                    JUDGE
\nJanuary 12, 2009.\n<\/p>\n
DKC\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Satbir Alias Satta vs State Of Haryana on 12 January, 2009 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 923-DB OF 2004 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. DATE OF DECISION: January 12, 2009 Parties Name Satbir alias Satta …APPELLANT. VERSUS State of Haryana …RESPONDENT CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH HON’BLE […]<\/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-230078","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSatbir Alias Satta vs State Of Haryana on 12 January, 2009 - 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\/satbir-alias-satta-vs-state-of-haryana-on-12-january-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Satbir Alias Satta vs State Of Haryana on 12 January, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/satbir-alias-satta-vs-state-of-haryana-on-12-january-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-01-11T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-08-03T02:26:04+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=\"20 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/satbir-alias-satta-vs-state-of-haryana-on-12-january-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/satbir-alias-satta-vs-state-of-haryana-on-12-january-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Satbir Alias Satta vs State Of Haryana on 12 January, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-01-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-03T02:26:04+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/satbir-alias-satta-vs-state-of-haryana-on-12-january-2009\"},\"wordCount\":3887,\"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\\\/satbir-alias-satta-vs-state-of-haryana-on-12-january-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/satbir-alias-satta-vs-state-of-haryana-on-12-january-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/satbir-alias-satta-vs-state-of-haryana-on-12-january-2009\",\"name\":\"Satbir Alias Satta vs State Of Haryana on 12 January, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-01-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-03T02:26:04+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/satbir-alias-satta-vs-state-of-haryana-on-12-january-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/satbir-alias-satta-vs-state-of-haryana-on-12-january-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/satbir-alias-satta-vs-state-of-haryana-on-12-january-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Satbir Alias Satta vs State Of Haryana on 12 January, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Satbir Alias Satta vs State Of Haryana on 12 January, 2009 - 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\/satbir-alias-satta-vs-state-of-haryana-on-12-january-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Satbir Alias Satta vs State Of Haryana on 12 January, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/satbir-alias-satta-vs-state-of-haryana-on-12-january-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-01-11T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-08-03T02:26:04+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":"20 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/satbir-alias-satta-vs-state-of-haryana-on-12-january-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/satbir-alias-satta-vs-state-of-haryana-on-12-january-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Satbir Alias Satta vs State Of Haryana on 12 January, 2009","datePublished":"2009-01-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-03T02:26:04+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/satbir-alias-satta-vs-state-of-haryana-on-12-january-2009"},"wordCount":3887,"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\/satbir-alias-satta-vs-state-of-haryana-on-12-january-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/satbir-alias-satta-vs-state-of-haryana-on-12-january-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/satbir-alias-satta-vs-state-of-haryana-on-12-january-2009","name":"Satbir Alias Satta vs State Of Haryana on 12 January, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-01-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-03T02:26:04+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/satbir-alias-satta-vs-state-of-haryana-on-12-january-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/satbir-alias-satta-vs-state-of-haryana-on-12-january-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/satbir-alias-satta-vs-state-of-haryana-on-12-january-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Satbir Alias Satta vs State Of Haryana on 12 January, 2009"}]},{"@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\/230078","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=230078"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/230078\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=230078"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=230078"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=230078"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}