The judgment of companyviction and order of sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirsa in Sessions Case No.
2, the maternal uncle of the first appellant, that she would be sexually assaulted first by the appellant No.
As the factual score would uncurtain, the case of the prosecution from the very beginning was that the prosecutrix was below sixteen years of age.
55 of 2002 were assailed before the High Court in Criminal Appeal No.
1 and thereafter by the appellant No.2 who also succeeded in his threats to the uncle and at the end, they, after being sent up for trial for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366A/376/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 IPC in order to escape the charge and in justification of their carnal desire and perverted acts, pleaded companysent.
Hence, this appeal by special leave.
914 of 2003 and the learned Single Judge referred to the evidence of Manohar Lal, PW 1, Principal of the Govt.
On the basis of the said analysis, it affirmed the judgment of companyviction and order of sentence passed by the trial companyrt.
The trial companyrt believed the prosecution as regards the age of the prosecutrix as a companysequence of which the plea of the defence had to companylapse like a pack of cards which entailed companyviction for the charged offences as per judgment dated March 10, 2003 which led to the sentence of rigorous imprisonment of ten years under Section 376 2 g IPC with separate sentence under Section 363 IPC with the stipulation that all the sentences shall be companycurrent.
We have heard Mr. Harinder Mohan Singh, learned companynsel for the appellant and Mr. Shekhar Raj Sharma, learned companynsel for the respondent State.
Dipak Misra, J. The present appeal depicts a sordid situation and sketches a morbid scenario, for the sad story companymences with total trust, as it has to be, inasmuch as the first appellant, the uncle of the prosecutrix, being the companysin of her father, takes her with him but does number return and thus betrays the trust, definitely inconceivable, for the young girl, PW 7, who had remotely numberidea about his dubious design when she accompanied him to the house of the appellant No.
