SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Boota Singh vs State Of Punjab on 31 March, 2018

CRA-S-447-SB-2012 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRA-S-447-SB-2012
Date of Decision: 31.03.2018

Boota Singh …Appellant

Versus

State of Punjab …Respondent

CORAM:- HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR

Present:- Mr. Amaninder Preet, Advocate
for the appellant.

Mr. I. P. S. Doabia, Addl. A.G., Punjab.

********

JAISHREE THAKUR, J. (Oral)

Appellant-Boota Singh assailed the judgment of conviction

dated 29.09.2011 and order of sentence dated 30.09.2011, passed by the

Additional Sessions Judge, Bathinda, whereby he was convicted for

committing offence punishable under Sections 376, 323 and 342 of the

Indian Penal Code and was sentenced as under:

Under Section 376 IPC To undergo rigorous imprisonment
for a period of 07 years and to pay a
fine of Rs. 50,000/- and in default of
payment of fine, to further undergo
rigorous imprisonment for 1 ½ years.
Under
Section 323 IPC To undergo rigorous imprisonment
for a period of 01 year.

Under Section 342 IPC To undergo rigorous imprisonment
for 01 year.

All the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently

and it was also ordered that the amount of fine i.e. `50,000/-, if recovered,

1 of 5
08-04-2018 10:32:59 :::
CRA-S-447-SB-2012 -2-

would be paid to the victim as compensation.

In brief, the facts as per prosecution are that on 26.12.2010 at

about 01.30 PM, ASI Gurmeet Singh along with other police officials from

Police Station City Kotakpura was present at the Traffic Lights Chowk,

Kotapura when the prosecutrix along with her sister and brother met the

police party and made her statement Ex. PF. In her statement, the

prosecutrix stated that she was residing at Devi Wala Road near Power

House, Street No. 06, Kotakpura and was aged around 36 years and that in

the year 2003, her husband had died. She also stated she was living along

with her two children and was working as a maid in various houses for

livelihood. She further alleged that on 24.12.2010 around 11.00 AM, she

was coming after working at the house of Khiba Singh and was returning to

her house. When she reached outside her home near Pulli (small bridge), her

neighbour Boota Singh was standing there and told her that his mother had

called her to their house and when the prosecutrix entered into the house of

the accused, the accused pushed her into a room and bolted the door from

inside. When the prosecutrix tried to raise raula, he threatened her and

started beating her with a stick as a consequence of which, the prosecutrix

received injuries. Eventually, the accused committed rape upon her against

her wishes. It was further alleged by the prosecutrix that at that time she did

not see the mother of the accused in the house and out of fear, she did not

disclose the incident to anyone. However, after calling her relatives, she

narrated the incident to her sister and brother who firstly took her to Civil

Hospital, Kotakpura on 25.12.2010 and since there was no lady doctor, she

was referred to Medical Hospital, Farikot on the same day, however, the

2 of 5
08-04-2018 10:33:00 :::
CRA-S-447-SB-2012 -3-

lady doctor, who was available there, did not admit her and told her to bring

the police. On account of night time, her relatives took her back and on

26.12.2010, the incident was brought to the notice of the police. On the

statement of the prosecutrix, a formal FIR was registered and all the

necessary investigation was carried out. After completion of the

investigation, challan was presented against the accused. Finding a

prima-facie case, charges under Sections 376, 323 and 342 of the IPC were

framed against the accused to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

Both the parties led their respective evidence and after hearing

both the parties and appraising the entire material and evidence on record,

learned trial Court convicted appellant-Boota Singh as mentioned in the

earlier part of this judgment. Aggrieved against the said judgment, the

appellant preferred the instant appeal.

During the pendency of the appeal before this Court, the

appellant moved an application bearing CRM-120-2013 seeking suspension

of his sentence, however, on 08.01.2013, the same was dismissed as

withdrawn with liberty to move the same at a later stage. Again on

12.02.2014, the appellant moved another application bearing CRM-4305-

2014 seeking suspension of his sentence, however, by an order dated

12.08.2014, this Court dismissed the said application too and the main

appeal was ordered to be fixed for hearing on 10.09.2014.

On 23.09.2017, the appeal was taken up for hearing, on which

date, a custody certificate was filed by the counsel for the respondent-State.

In the said custody certificate, it was submitted that the appellant was

released on four weeks’ parole on 02.01.2015 and was directed to surrender

3 of 5
08-04-2018 10:33:00 :::
CRA-S-447-SB-2012 -4-

on 31.01.2015 by an order dated 02.02.2015 by the District Magistrate,

Faridkot, however, till date neither has he surrendered nor has he taken in

custody. In such a situation, the respondent-State was directed to make

every effort to secure the presence of the appellant. However, he has not

been arrested nor has he surrendered so far. The appeal has been taken up

for hearing today and the situation is the same.

Learned counsel for the respondent-State argues that since the

appellant is voluntarily absconding and not making himself available to the

judicial process, it shows that he has no faith in justice delivery system,

hence, his appeal should be dismissed by this Court.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also

perused the record of the case.

The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment and

order passed by the trial Court wherein the appellant has been convicted for

committing offence punishable under Sections 376, 323 and 342 of the

Indian Penal Code. Offence under Section 376 IPC is a grievous offence

and considered as an offence against the society. The appellant was released

on four weeks’ parole on 02.01.2015 and was directed to surrender on

31.01.2015, however, till date neither has he surrendered nor has he been

arrested. His act in escaping from jail is a wilful, deliberate and gross

violation of the judicial process and it amounts to a defiance of the system

of criminal administration of justice and he is, therefore, not entitled to any

indulgence from this Court. Sine qua non for the hearing of the appeal is

that the accused-appellant is not absconding and the accused must be

available either before Court or before the jail. This Court does not want to

4 of 5
08-04-2018 10:33:00 :::
CRA-S-447-SB-2012 -5-

encourage the absconding accused for continuing to abscond by hearing his

criminal appeal on merits. It can encourage convicts, who are in jail, to

jump bail or furlough.

Counsel for the respondent-State has filed custody certificate

which shows that the appellant has undergone 04 years, 08 months and 12

days of his sentence including remissions. However, since the appellant has

misused the concession of parole allowed to him and has not surrendered,

his appeal itself is likely to be dismissed on the ground that he is not keen

on its adjudication.

In view of the above facts and circumstances, the instant appeal

is hereby dismissed. However, in case the appellant surrenders to the jail or

he is taken in custody, it will be open to him to move an application for

restoration of this appeal, which shall be considered in accordance with law.

(JAISHREE THAKUR)
31.03.2018 JUDGE
Waseem Ansari

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No

5 of 5
08-04-2018 10:33:00 :::

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2018 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please CLICK HERE to read Rules of Group, If You agree then Message us on Above Number.

We handle Women centric biased laws like False 498A, Domestic Violence(DVACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA24, 125 CrPc, 307, 313, 376, 377, 406, 420, 506, 509 etc

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh