The High Court dismissed the criminal appeal filed by the prosecutrix against the acquittal of the accused. The Court held that the victim, who was previously married, lived with the accused with free consent and represented themselves as a married couple to the society.
None. The appeal is dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Appeal No. D-343-DB of 2015 Date of Decision : April 09, 2015
Baby
.....Appellant
VERSUS
State of Punjab and another
.....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S.MANN HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SNEH PRASHAR
Present : Mr. Gurinderjit Singh, Advocate
T.P.S. MANN, J.
The prosecutrix has filed the present appeal for challenging the judgment dated 12.11.2014 passed by the Sessions Judge, Rupnagar whereby respondent No.2Sukhwinder Singh was acquitted of the charges under Sections 376, 420, 323 and 506 IPC.
The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the prosecutrix was working as a Peon in Municipal Committee, Ropar and respondent-Sukhwinder Singh was having physical relations with her for the last eight years on the promise that he would marry her. His brother Gurdeep Singh also helped him in this regard. She used to be threatened by them of being killed in case she disclosed about this fact to anyone. Later on, she came
SATISH KUMAR 2015.04.23 11:52 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
Criminal Appeal No. D-343-DB of 2015
-2-
to know that Sukhwinder Singh had performed marriage with some other woman. When the prosecutrix asked him in this regard, he gave her beatings and also threatened her.
Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and on going through the impugned judgment of acquittal, this Court finds that the prosecutrix was earlier married and on the death of her husband she had been given job in the Municipal Committee. In the year 2006, she came across the accused and both of them started talking to each other on telephone. On the death of her father in the year 2007, the accused became close to her and developed physical relations with her. Both of them took rented accommodation and started residing there. She lived with the accused till November 2011 and during that period, both of them had physical relations. The family members of the prosecutrix knew that she was living with the accused but did not approve of the same. The land-lady of the house admitted in her crossexamination that the victim and the accused lived together in her house as tenants for 7/8 years. The prosecutrix had also told her that she was married with the accused. During their stay in her house, there was no dispute between them and the prosecutrix was residing with the accused with her free consent. To the same effect were the stands taken by Pargat Singh and Ranjit Kaur, who were examined by the prosecution as PW4 and PW5,
SATISH KUMAR 2015.04.23 11:52 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
Criminal Appeal No. D-343-DB of 2015 -3-
respectively. It has also come in the evidence that the victim and the accused had been representing themselves as a married couple to the society. In the year 2008, she had become pregnant but her pregnancy was terminated on account of some medicine administered to her by the accused. Even, thereafter, the prosecutrix kept on living with the accused till they separated in November, 2011. In the background of such facts, it could not be said that the accused had promised to marry the prosecutrix and on that account she had been living with him. The victim, who was earlier married and her husband had died, was mature enough to know the consequences of her consenting to stay with the accused and maintaining physical relations with him.
Resultantly, the appeal is without any merit and, therefore, dismissed.
( T.P.S. MANN ) JUDGE
( SNEH PRASHAR ) April 09, 2015 JUDGE satish
SATISH KUMAR 2015.04.23 11:52 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellant is entitled to challenge the acquittal of the accused under Sections 376, 420, 323, and 506 IPC.
Whether the evidence establishes that the relationship was consensual and that no promise to marry induced the appellant.
Baby
State of Punjab and another
T.P.S. MANN
SNEH PRASHAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
