The appellants were also sentenced to suffer imprisonment for a period of 06 months for the commission of offence punishable under Section 342 of the IPC.
Prosecutrix-P.W.1, who at the relevant time was studying in 9 Class, was sleeping in her house with her parents and her grandmother namely, Chameli.
The prosecutrix told her mother about the occurrence of the incident and on the same day, at around 08:00 a.m., the prosecutrix accompanied by her parents, Simran and others went to the Police Post, where the statement of the prosecutrix came to be recorded.
Nikhil Tyagi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submitted that both the Trial Court as well as the High Court have grossly erred in recording the order of conviction.
Also Read: https://newslaw.in/supreme-court/supreme-court-upholds-justice-in-double-murder-case/
In any event, the testimony of the prosecutrix (P.W.1) is supported by the version of P.W.2 (Rajwati).
Ruchi Kohli, learned counsel appearing for the State further submitted that the entire defence of the appellants has been that of consent.
As such, it is clear that even according to the prosecution, the prosecutrix was dragged from her house to the house of accused Suresh.
Though the prosecutrix admits the letter addressed by her to accused Suresh, in the next blush, she states that she has neither visited the house of the Suresh nor Suresh has visited to her house. The appellants are directed to be set at liberty forthwith if their detention is not required in any other case.
Case Title: VED PAL Vs. THE STATE OF HARYANA
Case Number: Crl.A. No.-001205-001205 / 2021
