Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 4
PETITIONER:
RANVIR SINGH
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 01/11/1996
BENCH:
G.N. RAV, B.L. HANSARIA
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
J U D G M E N T
G.N.RAY.J.
This appeal is directed against judgment dated
11.6.1986 passed by the Indore Bench of the Madhya Pradesh
High Court in Criminal Appeal No.15 of 1983 arising out of
judgment dated 1.11.1963 passed by the learned Fourth
Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain Division in Sessions Trial
No.154 of 1982. By the impugned judgement, the High Court
has upheld the conviction of the appellant under Section 366
and 376 of the Indian Penal Code and consequential sentence
of rigorous imprisonment for three years on each count with
a direction that oath the sentences would run concurrently
as ordered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge.
The appellant was tried along with another accused
Jabbar for offences under Sections 363,366. A or in the
alternative under Section 366 IPC. The appellant was also
charged for offence under Section 376 IPC and the co-accused
was charged under Section 376 read with Section 109 IPC. It
may be stated here that the co-accused was acquitted by the
learned Additional Sessions judge of all the charges. The
accused appellant Ranvir Singh was a driver of a truck. The
prosecution case in short is that on 4.6.1982, the
prosecutric Annubai aged below 18 years and then living
under the guardianship of her father Dayaram at village
Biloank had gone to village Satrunda along with Kamla and
Anandi of the said village Biloank. At Satrunda, all of
them were waiting for a transport for going to Khacnrand. At
about 10 to 11 A.M. a truck No.6313 MPU came there being
driven by the appellant Ranvir Singh. on the assurance of
Ranvir Singh that the truck was going to Khacnrand all the
three ladies sat on the front side of the truck and it
started moving. About a kilometer away from village Runija
towards west the accused Ranvir Stopped the truck and told
that the engine had become hot and asked the ladies to take
water. The prosecutrix Annubai being unwell and also not
being thirsty then, did not get down out the other ladies
out down from the truck and proceeded towards the well.
Initially, Ranvir and the helper in the truck also got down
but with in a few minutes Ranvir came back and inside the
truck committed rape on Annubai. Annubai told about such
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 4
incident of raping to the other two ladies when they came
back but the place being lonely, they could not do anything
and decided to take up the matter at Runija. The truck
thereafter proceeded and stooped near Railway Station
Runija. Kamla and Anadi oat down from the truck and when
the prosecutrix Annubai tried to got down, she was pushed
back by Ranvir and the truck started moving. Kamla and
Anandi being certified informed the matter to the Station
master of Runija Railway Station. The Station Master
telephoned to the police station Badnagar. Annubai was
found inside the drivers cabin in the truck. The accused
persons were taken to police custody and the truck was
seized. Annubai lodged a report in the police station house
Barnagar. The police Barnagar handed over the case to the
police station Bhatpanchala. The police of the said
Bhatpanchala P.S. registered the offence and seized the
ghagra of the prosecutrix and the underwear of Ranvir Singh
which he was wearing then.
Both the prosecutrix and the accused Ranvir were
medically examined. The seized cloths of the prosecutrix
and Ranvir were sent for chemical examination and they were
found to be stained with semen and spermatozoa. The accused
denied the guilt. According to accused No.2 Jabbar, he had
no knowledge of rape and he was sitting on the dala of the
truck. Annubai (PW 4) gave deposition in support of the
allegation of being raped by the accused Ranvir. The age of
the prosecutrix was determined with the help of ossification
test. Dr. Vikas Choudhary, Asst, Surgeon, Civil Hospital of
Ujjain after examining X-Ray report of the prosecutrix gave
opinion that the age of Annubai was between 17 to 19 years.
Annubai stated that her age was about 16 years. Considering
the said evidences, the learned Additional Sessions Judge
held that the age of the prosecutrix was below 18 years and
as such question of her being under the custody of her
father Dayaram and her abduction from the lawful
guardianship of her father did not arise. PW 3 Dr. Rajmal
Jain had examined the accused on 5.6.1982 on the requisition
Ext.P-3A and Dr. Jain’s report is Ext.P-3. Dr. Jain found
Ranvir Singh capable of performing sexual intercourse. PW 14
Ramchandra Mishra. A.S.I.Badnagar has deposed that on the
basis of information received from P.W 5 Station Master
Runija Railway Station which was recorded in the Roznamcha
(Ext.P-10) of the police station he apprehended the said
truck and arrested the accused and also recovered at the
prosecutrix form inside the driver’s cabin of the truck. PW
5 has deposed that being told by the two ladies, he informed
the police. A.S.I Ramchandra Mishra has also deposed that
when by waiving his hand, he signalled the truck to stop,
the truck did not stop. But because there was a Toll Tax
barrier about 15 paces ahead, the truck had to stop there.
Sri Ramchandra Mishra has also deposed that accused Ranvir
was than driving the truck and on search of the truck, the
prosecutrix was found underneath the sleeping coach in
driver’s cabin. PW 4 Annubai has corroborated PW 14
Ramchandra Mishra as to the place from where the police had
found her inside the truck. PW 9 Kamla has supported the
prosecution case that in the assurance of Ranvir that the
truck was going to Khachrand all the three ladies got in to
truck and after some time the truck stooped and they were
told by Ranvir that the engine had become hot. As Annubai
was not feeling thirsty and was not also feeling well. She
had stayed back out all others including the driver got
down. Thereafter the driver came back to the truck. When
Kamla and Anandi came back Annubai told them that Ranvir
had raped he in the driver a seat and they decided to take
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 4
up the matter at Runija. She has also deposed that when the
truck stopped near Runija Railway Station she and Anandi has
got down out the prosecutrix was prevented by the accused
form getting down and the truck moved away. She then went to
the station master of Runija Railway Station and sought his
held.
The learned Additional Sessions Judge after considering
the evidence adduced in the case and also considering the
fact that the prosecutrix was found below the driver a seat
in the truck when the same was intercepted by the police and
also considering the fact that both on the ’ghagra of the
prosecutrix and on the underwear of Ranvir Singh semen and
spermatozoa had been found on chemical examination, accepted
the prosecution case that the accused had forcibly taken the
prosecutrix in the truck being driven by him and he had
also committed rape on the prosecutrix. Accordingly, the
said order of conviction and sentence for the offence under
Section had and 376 IPC. was passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge. The learned Additional Sessions
Judge did not accept the case of the accused Ranvir that the
prosecutrix was a women of easy virtue and she on her own
accord wanted to go to Ujjain and as such did not got down
at Runija and also hid herself beneath the driver a seat so
as to avoid detection by the police and thus prevented from
going to Ujjain and by her own consent she had allowed the
accused to have sexual intercourse with her. As aforesaid,
the High Court has also upheld the conviction and sentence
passed against the accused Ranvir.
Mr. Bimal Dave, learned counsel appearing for the
accused appellant, has submitted that the age of the
prosecutrix was found by the court as above 16 years at the
time of incident. It has also come out in the evidence that
the prosecutrix intended to do to Ujjain in the said truck.
It is also an admitted position that the prosecutrix and her
two companions voluntarily got in to truck for taking a
lift. It has also come out in evidence that when the truck
had to be stopped as the engine became very hot, every one
in the truck got down except the prosecutrix and she on her
own will, stayed back and remained inside the driver’s
cabin. The prosecutrix did not suffer any injury on her
person even scratches and bruises which were reasonably
excepted if one was subjected to race against her will by
the accused Ranvir. It has also come out in the evidence
that the prosecutrix was a women of easy virtue. It is
therefore quite likely that in order to induce Ranvir to
give her a free lift up to Ujjain, she voluntarily agreed to
have sexual intercourse with the accused. Accordingly, the
appellant was not liable to be convicted for either of the
said offences, namely under Section 366 and 376 IPC. The
appeal should therefore, be allowed by setting aside the
conviction and sentence passed.
After giving our careful consideration to the facts and
circumstances of the case and the submissions made by Mr.
Dave. we are unable to accept the contentions of Mr.Dave. It
has been Clearly submitted that the prosecutrix and her two
companions Kamla and Anandi got inside driver a cabin when
they sought a lift up to Khacnarnd in the truck driven by
the accused Ranvir after being assured by the said accused
that the truck was going to khachrand. It has also been
established that when accused stopped the truck by stating
that the engine became hot, excepting prosecutrix every one
got down. After some time when Kamla and Anandi after
taking water from a well came Back they found the
prosecutrix and the accused in the truck, immediately, the
prosecutrix complained to Kamla and Anandi that she was
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 4
raped by Ranvir. As the place was lonely out of fear, the
prosecutrix and two other ladies decided to take the matter
after reaching Runija. It has been also clearly established
by the deposition of Kamla that although Kamla and Anandi
could get down near Runija Railway Station. Ranvir drove
away the truck with prosecutrix. Immediately Kamla sought
help of the station master at Runija who had telephoned to
the police. It has also come out in the evidence that when
police wanted to stop the truck being driven by Ranvir,
Ranvir initially did not stop at the signal of the police
Officer but had to stop little ahead because of barrier for
collecting toll tax. The prosecutrix was found by the
police inside the driver’s cabin under the driver’s seat.
Her ghagra and the underwear of Ranvir were seized by the
police and on chemical examination semen and spermatozoa
were found on both the said garments. Even of the
prosecutrix was a woman of easy virtue, she could not at
raped by the accused. If she had voluntarily agreed to have
sexual intercourse with the accused, she would not have
complained immediately when Kamla and Anandi came back.
The police when signalled the truck did not see the
prosecutrix sitting in the driver’s cabin. In case of
voluntarily accompanying the accuse for a lift up to Ujjain
she was expected to be seated comfortably in the truck and
not to be found out beneath the driver a seat.
In our view in the facts of the case, the conviction
and sentence of the appellant are fully justified. The
appeal is, therefore, dismissed. The appellant has been
released on bail. His bail bonds stand cancelled. He would
be taken to custody to serve out the sentence.