PW 5, in this companynection, in her deposition stated My father in law was Man Singh and he had two brothers, namely, Ganpat and Mohar Lal.
I do number know if this land was distributed as such at the instance of Sultan, father of the accused.
20,000/ .
The prosecutrix having been examined after 80 hours, the medical report as also the evidence must be companysidered in the factual companytext brought on record.
I was wearing the same underwear and salwar, which were smeared with blood, after reaching home.
Aggrieved thereby and dissatisfied therewith, the appellant filed an appeal before the Punjab and Haryana High Court, which has also been dismissed by reason of the impugned judgment.
He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fine of Rs.
After hearing the voice of her aunt, the appellant left her and ran away.
The prosecution case is as under The prosecutrix was a minor.
The evidence of the prosecutirx, who is a child witness, having been found to be companyvincing and her evidence having been companyroborated by her aunt Khazani PW 5 , numberinterference with the impugned judgments is warranted.
The occurrence took place on 5.02.1993 at about 8 a.m. The prosecutrix went to the field to bring fodder.
I had number taken a bath when I was brought to Civil Hospital, Bhiwani.
It is incorrect that there was a water dispute from a Nali with the accused.
I do number know if my husband was companymitting thefts.
The accused got discharged when performed the sexual intercourse and that discharged material had smeared my body at the relevant place.
Mohar Lal had given his entire land to the sons of Ganpat and numberland was given to the sons of Man Singh.
Appellant was a companyvillager.
My underwear was that of elastic and it was number broken.
I do number know if he was killed because of any thefts.
So properly her vaginal examination was number possible.
Our attention, however, was drawn to the following statements made by her in her cross examination There was numberstring of cloth of my underwear.
We have a separate water channel.
She was admittedly a minor.
When she reached near the fields of one Nihala, the appellant came near her and forcibly lifted her.
She raised an alarm but the appellant gagged her mouth and started sexually assaulting her.
It is incorrect that I killed my husband.
Vaginal rugosities were number well maintained.
The learned trial Judge found the appellant guilty of companymission of the offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.
My underwear and salwar were got changed in Bhiwani after reaching the hospital.
Member Panchayats were also in that panchayat in the village.
She was aged about 11 years.
In her examination in chief, she supported the accusations made against the appellant in the First Information Report.
As per the First Information Report, on 5.02.1993 at about 8.00 a.m., she went to the fields to bring fodder.
The learned Judge was satisfied that she was companypetent to depose.
Appellant was accused of a charge of companymission of an offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.
B. SINHA, J Leave granted.
In default of payment of fine, he was directed to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for two years.
