HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT
JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Leave To Appeal No. 350 / 2017
Smt Raju Bai
—-Appellant
Versus
Ajuba @ Shankar And Anr
—-Respondent
__
For Appellant(s) : Mr. G.S. Gautam for Mr. Nitin Kumar Sharma
For Respondent(s) : Mr. NS Dhakad PP
__
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA
Order
15/12/2017
The present application for leave to appeal has been
filed to assail the impugned judgment dated 15.2.2017, rendered
by the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Women Atrocities
Cases, No.1, Kota. The said court acquitted accused respondent
for the offence under Section 376 IPC but held him guilty for
offence under Section 354 IPC and sentenced him to undergo
three years RI and pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default thereof to
undergo additional six months SI.
In the present application for leave to appeal,
grievance has been made that the trial Judge gravely erred to
acquit accused respondent for offence under Section 376 IPC. The
trial Judge noted that when the prosecutrix stated that the last
time alleged rape was committed, her mother-in-law while
searching for her and found her in compromising position with the
accused. The relevant finding given by the trial Judge reads as
(2 of 3)
[CRLLA-350/2017]
under:-
“;gka bl ckr dk mYys[k djuk mfpr gksxk fd ihfM+rk jktw
ckbZ vius c;kuksa esa ;g dg jgh gS fd vkf[kjh ckj tc esjs
lkFk vtwck cykRdkj dj jgk Fkk rks esjh lkl esa wars gq;s
vkdj cykRdkj djrs ns[k fy;k FkkA ysfdu lkl ih0MCY;w0
2 yhykckbZ ;g dg jgh gS fd igyh ckj esjh cgw jktw ckbZ
us eqs ;g crk;k Fkk fd igys Hkh mlds lkFk vtwck xyr
dke dj pqdk gSA ;g fojks/kkHkklh dFku Hkh cykRdkj djus
ds rF; dks lkfcr djus esa lansg iSnk djrk gSA vkxs
yhykckbZ dk ;g dguk gS fd gkFk idM+us dh ?kVuk ds ckn
eSa fjiksVZ izn’kZ ih- 1 o pkd ,QvkbZvkj izn’kZ ih- 2 cgq dks
lkFk ystdkj ntZ djkus vk;h Fkh vkSj iqfyl us nksuksa txgksa
dk uD’kk izn’kZ ih 3 o ih 4 cuk;k FkkA bldk ;g dguk gS
fd ;g ckr lgh gS fd Vkijh okyh us eqs vkdj dgk Fkk
fd vtwck us esjh cgq dk gkFk idM+ j[kk gSA vkxs ;g dgrh
gS fd ;g ckr xyr gS fd eSaus viuh cgq dks [k.Mgj esa bl
?kVuk ls ,d efgus igys vtwck ds lkFk mlds Åij iM+k
ns[k gksA bldh lk{; ls ihfM+rk us vius lkFk cykRdkj
dh ?kVuk lkl ds }kjk ns[kus dk tks dFku fd;k gS mldh
rkbZn ugha gksrh gSA dsoy fjiksVZ djokus okys fnu vtwck }
kjk ihfM+rk dk gkFk idM+ dj mls tcjnLrh ys tkus vkSj
csbTtrh djus dh ckr gh izdV gks jgh gSA”
The trial Judge further noted that the prosecutrix
admitted that in one month, accused had performed sexual
intercourse four times and due to threat given by the accused,
that he will liquidate her husband, she had not reported the
matter to the police. Taking conduct of the prosecutrix, the trial
Judge held it to be a case of consensual sex. Hence, the view
formulated by the trial Judge to acquit the accused respondent of
(3 of 3)
[CRLLA-350/2017]offence under Section 376 IPC, is one view, which is possible on
appreciation of evidence and same cannot be termed perverse.
Consequently, the present application for leave to
appeal being devoid of merits is dismissed.
(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA)J.
Mak/-
