Case of the prosecution as per FIR is that on 19th April, 1993, when the prosecutrix PW 1 was sleeping in her house at 1.00 A.M., the appellant along with companyaccused Sahab Singh Mutta entered the house of the prosecutrix and both of them companymitted rape on the prosecutrix and then fled away.
They were carrying knife which was shown to the prosecutrix to threaten her if she raised alarm.
The said affidavit was duly acted upon by the trial Court, as the prosecutrix appeared in Court and supported the companytents of the affidavit, for granting the accused anticipatory bail vide Order dated 29th April, 1993.
The order of anticipatory bail reads as under Affidavit of the companyplainant perused.
The prosecutrix narrated the incident to her husband and lodged First Information Report at the Police Station on the next day.
We have heard learned companynsel for the parties.
The prosecutrix gave affidavit dated 23th April, 1993 three days after the lodging of the FIR, disowning the version and exonerating the appellant.
After investigation both the accused were sent up for trial.
Relying upon her version supported by her husband Balkishan PW 2 and Kotwar of the village Manaklal PW 3 , the trial Court companyvicted and sentenced the appellant which has been companyfirmed by the High Court.
Accordingly, he was acquitted by the trial Court.
The discrepancies pointed out are as follows Though initially, two persons were named and it was alleged that both threatened the prosecutrix with a knife, version at the trial was different and only the appellant has been named.
ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. This appeal has been preferred against the companyviction and sentence of the appellant for offences under Sections 450 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code IPC for which the appellant stands sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years under both heads but the sentences are to run companycurrently, apart from being sentenced to pay fine.
