CRA-S-3845-SB-2013
CRA-S-3846-SB-2013
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
(1) CRA-S-3845-SB-2013
Gagandeep Singh @ Gagan
…Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana
…Respondent
(2) CRA-S-3846-SB-2013
Jagroop Singh @ Roopa
…Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana
…Respondent
Date of decision:-20.9.2018
CORAM : HON’ BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. MADAAN
Present: Mr.Satnam Singh Gill, Advocate
for the appellant in CRA-S-3845-SB-2013.
Mr.Ved Parkash, Advocate
for the appellant in CRA-S-3846-SB-2013.
Ms. Aditi Girdhar, AAG, Haryana.
****
H.S. MADAAN, J.
Vide this judgment, I propose to dispose of two appeals i.e.
CRA-S-3845-SB-2013 filed by appellant – Gagandeep Singh @ Gagan
and CRA-S-3846-SB-2013 filed by appellant – Jagroop Singh @ Roopa,
1 of 14
::: Downloaded on – 08-10-2018 05:30:22 :::
CRA-S-3845-SB-2013
CRA-S-3846-SB-2013
2
both of them being accused in FIR No.295 dated 14.5.2011, under
Sections 294, 506, 376, 120-B IPC and 67(a,b,c) and 68 of Information
Technology Act, registered with Police Station Assandh, who were tried
by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Exclusive Court of the cases of
Heinous Crime against Women), Karnal and vide order dated
7.10.2013, they along with their co-accused Gur Lal Singh @ Lali were
convicted for the offences under Sections 376 and 506 read with Section
120-B IPC, whereas for the remaining offences they were acquitted and
vide order dated 9.10.2013 they (the appellants) were sentenced to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 7 years and to pay a fine
of Rs.10,000/- each for the offence under Section 120-B read with
Section 376 IPC and in default thereof, to further undergo simple
imprisonment for a period of six months each and they were further
sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 2 years and
to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- each for the offence under Section 506 read
with Section 120-B IPC and in default thereof, to further undergo simple
imprisonment for a period of three months each. However, it was
ordered that if fine was paid, 50% of the same shall be released in favour
of the victim in view of the provisions of Section 357-A Cr.P.C.
All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
The accused-convicts, who are appellants before this Court
prayed that the appeals be accepted, the impugned judgment of their
conviction and order of sentence be set aside and they be acquitted of
the charge framed against them.
Briefly stated, facts of the case, as per prosecution story, are
that complainant Narinder Singh had submitted a complaint dated
2 of 14
::: Downloaded on – 08-10-2018 05:30:22 :::
CRA-S-3845-SB-2013
CRA-S-3846-SB-2013
3
14.5.2011 to the police stating therein that his daughter (name withheld
to protect her identity in view of Section 228-A IPC and as per the
directions given by the Hon’ble Apex Court Court in case titled State of
Karnataka Vs. Puttaraja, 2004(1) RCR(Cri.) Supreme Court, 113 (SC)
(hereinafter referred to as the ‘prosecutrix/victim’) aged about 15 years
was student of 10+1 class going to the school daily; that accused Gur
Lal Singh @ Lali, a resident of Khijrabad by photographic tricks put
face of the victim on the nude body of some woman, uploading the same
on the social media to cause mental harassment to the victim and to
defame her; that he also used to give threats to kill the victim.
On the basis of such written complaint by complainant
Narinder Singh, father of the prosecutrix/victim, an FIR No.295 dated
14.5.2011, under Sections 294 and 506 IPC as well as under Section
67(a,b,c) of Information Technology Act was registered. The matter was
investigated, during the course of which, it transpired that Gur Lal Singh
@ Lali was lodged in District Jail, Karnal in another criminal case,
therefore, his production warrants were got issued and he was joined in
the investigation and formally arrested in this case. During the course of
investigation, on 22.5.2011 the complainant Narinder Singh had
submitted a CD as well as mobile phone make Nokia before the
investigating agency, which were taken into possession vide a seizure
memo. Accused Gur Lal Singh @ Lali was interrogated, during the
course of which, he suffered a disclosure statement that about two years
ago, he had met the victim at marriage function of his maternal uncle’s
son and they got acquainted with each other and that he had taken
photographs of the victim with his mobile phone, thereafter, preparing
3 of 14
08-10-2018 05:30:22 :::
CRA-S-3845-SB-2013
CRA-S-3846-SB-2013
4
CD of that photograph by computer at Goldi Communication belonging
to accused Pardeep @ Goldi, where Gur Lal Singh @ Lali used to work
earlier. Such accused further disclosed that in the month of November,
2010 nude photo of the victim with him was prepared by Gagan in his
Alto car at Malikpur with a mobile phone belonging to his friend
Satinder Singh and thereafter he had taken out the mobile chip from that
mobile and prepared a CD with the help of computer at the said shop
and returned mobile to Satinder Singh and that he had kept concealed
the two CDs and the mobile chip in an almirah in the house of his sister
Raman Kaur at Nissing, which he could get recovered. Thereafter, such
accused Gur Lal Singh @ Lali in pursuance of his disclosure statement
got recovered the Alto car bearing temporary No.HR99EP-3615 used in
the commission of crime from the house of his co-accused Gagan, which
was taken into police possession. He also demarcated the scene of
occurrence and a memo in that respect was prepared besides other
documents.
On 24.5.2011, accused Gur Lal Singh @ Lali while in
police custody in pursuance of the disclosure statement suffered by him
led the police party to the place disclosed by him and got recovered two
CDs and two chips from the house of his relative namely Gur Lal, which
were taken into possession vide memo.
Then accused Pardeep @ Goldi was arrested in this case on
24.5.2011 and he got recovered a computer having monitor LG
company, CPU make Odyssey, keyboard make Intex and a mouse,
which were taken into possession.
On that very day i.e. 24.5.2011 Satinder Pal Singh had
4 of 14
08-10-2018 05:30:22 :::
CRA-S-3845-SB-2013
CRA-S-3846-SB-2013
5
produced his mobile phone make Nokia 5233 by which the obscene
video of the victim and accused Gur Lal Singh @ Lali was prepared. It
was identified by accused Gur Lal Singh @ Lali and taken into police
possession vide a memo.
On 25.5.2011, accused Gur Lal Singh @ Lali while being
interrogated had suffered a disclosure statement to the effect that about
eight months earlier, he had taken nude photographs of the victim in the
tubewell room of Kashmir Singh and thereafter committed rape upon
her and he had also committed rape upon the the prosecutrix where nude
video of the victim was prepared in the Alto car and that in March, 2011
in order to defame the victim, he had downloaded his nude video with
the victim by CD in the folder in E-drive of the computer, wherein there
were already blue films at the shop of Virk Mobile of Sonu @
Bachhitar, where he used to work and thereafter he had downloaded that
film in the mobile chips of the customers and charged Rs.50/- from each
customer and when the matter had become talk of town, then he and
Sonu had deleted that film from the computer and he had left the shop.
In such statement Gur Lal Singh @ Lali offered to get the
computer, CPU, mouse and keyboard recovered. In pursuance of his
disclosure statement, accused Gur Lal Singh @ Lali demarcated the
scene of occurrence. A cot on which rape had been committed upon the
victim by Gur Lal Singh @ Lali was recovered from the tubewell room
of Kashmir Singh.
Gur Lal Singh @ Lali was got medically examined from
PW3 Dr.Munish Kumar, who did not find any sign of external injury on
his person. The doctor gave an opinion that there was nothing to suggest
5 of 14
::: Downloaded on – 08-10-2018 05:30:22 :::
CRA-S-3845-SB-2013
CRA-S-3846-SB-2013
6
that accused was incapable of doing sexual intercourse and a medico
legal certificate was issued in that regard.
Accused Bachittar Singh @ Sonu was arrested and a
computer set comprising CPU, monitor, keyboard and mouse with data
cable were taken into possession from his shop being run under the
name and style of Virk Communication, Assandh.
On 26.5.2011 statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. of the
victim was got recovered by Judicial Magistrate, wherein she stated
about role of accused Gagandeep Singh @ Gagan and Jagroop Singh.
She stated that sports activities were going on in their school i.e. DAV
Public School, Assandh; that after school hours, she had gone with Gur
Lal Singh @ Lali in a vehicle towards the passage leading to Danoli;
that Gagan was driving the vehicle; that Gagan and one another boy
along with him went outside of the vehicle; thereafter Gur Lal Singh @
Lali offered her a glass of water and after drinking it, she does not know
what happened to her and when she regained consciousness, she found
herself to be without clothes, then she put on clothes; that Gur Lal Singh
@ Lali told her that he had committed wrong act with her; that thereafter
she returned to her home but did not tell the occurrence to anybody;
thereafter she made a call to Gur Lal Singh @ Lali and asked him as to
why he did so to which he replied that he was desirous of doing so; that
then her maternal uncle residing in Patiala informed her that her film
was on the internet.
On the same day, the victim demarcated the scenes of
occurrence and site plans of the same were prepared. The victim was got
medically examined from PW1 Dr.Neeru Bala, who did not find any
6 of 14
08-10-2018 05:30:22 :::
CRA-S-3845-SB-2013
CRA-S-3846-SB-2013
7
external mark of fresh injury on her person, however, on examining her
private parts, hymen was found ruptured on all sides and posterior
vaginal wall was visible, which could admit one finger loosely. The
doctor concerned gave an opinion that possibility of sexual assault could
not be ruled out. She proved the medico legal certificate of the victim.
Thereafter, Section 376 IPC was added in the FIR.
On 18.6.2011, accused Gagandeep @ Gagan, who was on
anticipatory bail was made to join the investigation. Accused Jagroop
Singh was yet to be arrested.
During the investigation, it came out that accused
Gagandeep @ Gagan had provided his Maruti Alto car to Gur Lal Singh
@ Lali with an intention to commit rape by him upon the prosecutrix
and had taken the victim in the said car from village Danoli to kacha
path, leading to village Malikpur and accused Jagroop @ Roopa had
remained present at the time of committing of rape upon the victim. He
had assisted the accused Gur Lal Singh @ Lali and Gagan in that illegal
act besides helping them in preparing the obscene video of the victim.
Accused Manoj Kumar was arrested in this case on
4.7.2011 and from his cyber cafe under the name and style of Magnet
Computer Gallery, 5 CPUs were recovered, which were taken into
possession, a register having entries of users of internet maintained by
accused Manoj Kumar was also seized by the Investigating Officer.
During the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer
had obtained a copy of birth certificate of the victim issued by Registrar
(Births Deaths), Municipal Committee, Assandh.
After completion of investigation and other formalities,
7 of 14
::: Downloaded on – 08-10-2018 05:30:22 :::
CRA-S-3845-SB-2013
CRA-S-3846-SB-2013
8
challan against accused Gur Lal Singh @ Lali, Pardeep @ Goldi,
Bachittar Singh @ Sonu and Manoj Kumar under Sections 294, 506 and
376 read with Section 120-B IPC as well as under Sections 67(a,b,c) and
68 of Information Technology Act was filed in the Court. Accused
Gagandeep @ Gagan and Jagroop Singh remained to be arrested in this
case, therefore it was mentioned in the challan that supplementary
challan would be submitted in the Court after their arrest.
On presentation of challan in the Court of Sub Divisional
Judicial Magistrate, Assandh, copies of documents relied upon in the
challan were supplied to accused Gur Lal Singh @ Lali, Pardeep @
Goldi, Bachittar Singh @ Sonu and Manoj Kumar free of costs as
provided under Section 207 Cr.P.C. Then finding that offence under
Sections 376 IPC is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, learned
Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Assandh committed the case to the
Court of learned Sessions Judge, Panipat from where it was entrusted to
the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal.
Accused Jagroop Singh @ Roopa was arrested in this case
on 19.8.2011 and while being interrogated on 20.8.2011, he suffered a
disclosure statement regarding the manner of occurrence and in
pursuance thereof, he demarcated the scene of occurrence.
Accused Gagandeep @ Gagan was arrested on 5.9.2011
and he also demarcated the scenes of occurrence.
On completion of investigation, supplementary challan
against accused Jagroop Singh @ Roopa and Gagandeep Singh @
Gagan was filed in the Court on 6.9.2011.
After complying with the provisions of Section 207 Cr.P.C.,
8 of 14
::: Downloaded on – 08-10-2018 05:30:22 :::
CRA-S-3845-SB-2013
CRA-S-3846-SB-2013
9
learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Assandh committed the case
to the Court of Sessions and supplementary challan was tagged with the
main challan.
On receipt of case in the Court of learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Karnal, observing that charge for offences under
Sections 376, 294 and 506 read with Section 120-B IPC as well as for
the offences punishable under Sections 67(a,b,c) and 68 of Information
Technology Act read with Section 120-B IPC was disclosed against the
accused charge-sheeted them accordingly, to which, they pleaded not
guilty and claimed trial. The case was then fixed for evidence of the
prosecution.
During the course of its evidence, the prosecution has
examined as many as twelve witnesses i.e. Dr.Neeru Bala as PW1,
victim as PW2, Dr. Munish Kumar as PW3, Ramesh Kumar, Patwari as
PW4, SI Gajraj Singh as PW5, ASI Sumer Singh as PW6, Nazar Singh
as PW7, EHC Surjit Singh as PW8, complainant Narinder Singh, father
of the victim as PW9, EASI Kuldeep Singh as PW10, Inspector Subhash
Chand, Investigating Officer as PW11 and Ms.Shashi Chauhan,
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Panipat as PW12.
With that the prosecution evidence stood closed.
Statements of the accused were recorded under Section 313
Cr.P.C., in which all the incriminating circumstances appearing against
such accused were put to them but they denied the allegations
contending that they are innocent and have been falsely involved in this
case.
Accused did not lead any evidence in defence despite
9 of 14
::: Downloaded on – 08-10-2018 05:30:22 :::
CRA-S-3845-SB-2013
CRA-S-3846-SB-2013
10
availing opportunity.
After hearing arguments, learned trial Court convicted and
sentenced the accused as mentioned supra, which left them aggrieved
and they have filed the present appeals.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties besides going
through the record and find that there is no merit in the appeals.
The prosecution by bringing cogent and convincing
evidence both oral as well as documentary had successfully proved its
charge against accused Gur Lal Singh @ Lali for the offences under
Section 376 read with Section 120-B IPC and Section 506 read with
Section 120-B IPC, whereas against accused Gagandeep Singh @
Gagan and jagroop Singh @ Roopa under Sections 120-B read with
Section 376 IPC and 506 read with Section 120-B IPC. It comes out that
all the three had prior meeting of mind with regard to committing of the
crime and they had hatched a conspiracy to do so.
PW2, the victim had reiterated on oath the version given by
her to the police categorically stating that Gur Lal Singh @ Lali had
taken out her photographs from the marriage album of his sister and then
prepared an obscene video from those photographs with the assistance
of his friends and later on he started pressurising and blackmailing her
that if she did not accompany him, he would display the photographs on
the net or upload the same on the net, upon which the victim got nervous
and followed him. She supported the prosecution story with regard to
Gur Lal Singh @ Lali riding her in the Alto car after making her
consumed a liquid resulting in her her getting unconscious and on
regaining consciousness finding herself to be nude. She further deposed
10 of 14
::: Downloaded on – 08-10-2018 05:30:22 :::
CRA-S-3845-SB-2013
CRA-S-3846-SB-2013
11
regarding raping her in tubewell room of Kashmir Singh between 3 to 5
p.m., Gur Lal Singh @ Lali holding out threats to her. She gave her date
of birth as 25.1.1996 proving her birth certificate as Ex.P6.
PW1 Dr.Neeru Bala, who had medico legally examined the
prosecutrix did not rule out the possibility of sexual assault upon her.
From the testimony of PW3 Dr.Munish Kumar, it comes
out that Gur Lal Singh was capable of doing sexual intercourse.
PW4 Ramesh Kumar had prepared a scaled site plan of the
spot on pointing of the victim on 30.5.2011.
PW5 SI Gajraj Singh deposed regarding accused Gur Lal
Singh suffering a disclosure statement with regard to concealing of CD
and mobile chip in an almirah in the house of his sister Raman Kaur in
Nissing and subsequently in pursuance thereof getting those items
recovered. He further deposed regarding what had transpired in his
presence.
PW6 ASI Sumer Singh stated that registration certificate of
Alto car used in the commission of crime was taken into possession in
his presence.
PW7 Nazar Singh, a relative of the complainant Narinder
Singh deposed that in the month of April, 2011, he had gone to Virk
Communication, Assandh of accused Bachhitar Singh for getting
Gurbani downloaded in his mobile phone and accused while
downloading Gurbani also downloaded the blue film of the victim and
Gur Lal, which was talk of the town by the name of Assandh Kand.
PW8 EHC Surjit Singh, who had remained associated in the
investigation of the case deposed regarding what had transpired in his
11 of 14
08-10-2018 05:30:22 :::
CRA-S-3845-SB-2013
CRA-S-3846-SB-2013
12
presence proving various documents.
PW9 complainant Narinder Singh supported the case of the
prosecution on material aspects proving various documents.
PW10 EASI Kuldeep Singh deposed regarding
Investigating Officer depositing case property with him on various dates
and then his depositing the same with FSL, Madhuban on different
dates. He proved his affidavit Ex.P26 stating that till the case property
remained in his possession, neither he nor anybody else was allowed to
tamper with the same.
PW11 Inspector/SHO Subhash Chand, who had carried out
the investigation in the case initially before whom Narinder Singh
complainant had submitted a written complaint on 14.5.2011, on the
basis of which FIR was recorded deposed regarding special reports sent
to the higher authorities, going to the house of complainant, meeting the
prosecutrix, recording her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and then
searching for accused Gur Lal Singh @ Lali, on coming to know that he
was lodged in District Jail, Karnal in a case under NDPS Act, reaching
there got issued production warrants from Illaqa Magistrate. He
otherwise testified regarding what he has done in the case and what has
been done in his presence.
PW12 Ms.Shashi Chauhan, Additional Chief Judicial
Magistratre, Karnal had got her statement recorded through video
conferencing with respect to recording of statement of the victim under
Section 164 Cr.P.C. on 26.5.2011 on police application besides proving
other documents.
In the instant case, the most important witness for the
12 of 14
::: Downloaded on – 08-10-2018 05:30:22 :::
CRA-S-3845-SB-2013
CRA-S-3846-SB-2013
13
prosecution happened to be PW2 the victim, who has fully supported the
case of the prosecution. Although this PW was cross-examined at length
on behalf of the accused but she stuck to her guns and could not be
shattered on any material point. A few minor contradictions and
variations in her statement do not go to the root of matter since those are
bound to occur due to difference in power of perception, observation
and retention of events in various persons and so also due to lapse of
memory due to passage of time etc. The fact cannot be lost sight of that
different persons have got variable memorization of the events. Merely
because a witness slipped at a few places regarding the minute details
does not go to put a question mark over his credibility and truthfulness.
These minor variations and contradictions rather go to show that the
witness has deposed in a natural and truthful manner unlike tutored
witnesses who testify in a parrot like manner.
Similarly no previous enmity between the complainant and
other accused has been alleged or proved prompted by which he might
have embarked upon treading the danger path of false implication to
wreak vengeance.
The medical evidence corroborates the ocular evidence. The
investigation in this case has been conducted in a fair and impartial
manner. The Investigating Officer had no reason to involve the accused
in this case wrongly, challan them falsely or to depose against them to
secure their conviction. Remaining evidence also supports the
prosecution story.
I do not find any illegality or infirmity with the impugned
judgment passed by the trial Court. Rather it is based upon proper
13 of 14
::: Downloaded on – 08-10-2018 05:30:22 :::
CRA-S-3845-SB-2013
CRA-S-3846-SB-2013
14
appraisal and appreciation of evidence and correct interpretation of law.
Keeping in view the gravity of allegations against the
appellants, no ground is there to reduce the sentence of imprisonment.
Therefore, both the appeals stand dismissed.
Appellants – Gagandeep @ Gagan and Jagroop @ Roopa
are stated to be on bail granted to them by this Court while suspending
their sentence. Their bails are cancelled. Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Karnal is directed to issue arrest warrants to get them arrested so as to
make them undergo the remaining sentence.
20.9.2018 (H.S.MADAAN)
Brij JUDGE
Whether reasoned/speaking : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
14 of 14
08-10-2018 05:30:22 :::
