STATE OF H.P. v. SURESH KUMAR @ CHHOTU

Citation: [2008] 13 S.C.R. 1

Court: Supreme Court of India

Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT, P. SATHASIVAM, AFTAB ALAM

Case summary

STATE OF H.P. v. SURESH KUMAR @ CHHOTU.pdf

Judgment text

[2008] 13S. C. R. 1 )' STATE OF H. P. v. SURESH KUMAR @ CHHOTU (Criminal Appeal No. 973 of 2002) AUGUST 28, 2008 [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, P. SATHASIVAM AND AFTAB ALAM, JJ] Penal. Code, 1860: ss. 36;3, 368 and 376 - Kidnapping and rape - HELD: High Court has rightly concluded that accusations were not established and prosecutrix was more than 16 years of age at the time of occurrence - Findings of High Court about age of prosecutrix cannot be said to be without any basis - High Court was justified in its conclusions about the prosecutrix having accompanied the accused on her own and being a consenting party to the sexual acts. {. CRIMINALAPPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 973 bf 2002 t From the final Judgment and Order dated 5. 11. 2001 of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla in Crl. Appeal No. 507 of 1999 Naresh K. Sharma and Meenakshi Arora for the Appellant ,-1 The Order'of the Court was delivered by Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.

Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Himachal Pradesh High Court directing acquittal of the respondent (hereinafter referred to as the 'accused'). Learned Sessions Judge, Kangra at Dharamshala had found the accused guilty of offences punishable under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short 'IPC') and sentenced him to undergo rig- " orous imprisonment for seven years and two years and fine with default stipulation. l. Ti;2 prosecution version as unfolded during trial is as fol- Prosecutrix (PW-2) daughter of Nirmala Devi (PW-1) and J:igar Nath (PW-3) was, on 23. 3. 1996 present in her house in viiiage Sadwan. The accused and lshwar Dass alias Sheru (who f3 was a co-accused before the trial court and will be referred to r - We find that the High Court was justified in its conclusions about the prosecutrix having accompanied the accused on her own and being a consenting party to the sexual acts. As rightly ..

contended by learned counsel for the State, if the age of the ' prosecutrix was below 16 years, the consent would be of no consequence. But the High Court's findings as regards the age of the prosecutrix cannot be said to be without any basis. The High Court has analysed the oral evidence and the documen- "' tary evidence to come to a conclusion that the date of birth of the prosecutrix as claimed by the prosecution has not been @ CHHOTU [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. ] established. That being so, we find no merit in this appeal which A is accordingly dismissed. We record our appreciation for the assistance rendered by learned Amicus Curiae. R. P. Appeal dismissed. B