Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having been taken
through the judgments of the Courts below as also keeping in view the position of the
prosecutrix, we are of the opinion that no case has been made out for our interference
in the matter.
Admittedly, Ajaib Singh, who was convicted for commission of an offence
under Section 376 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for
10 years, has not approached this Court. The appellant herein is the sister of the
mother of the prosecutrix. It has been established by the prosecution by bringing
cogent and sufficient evidence on record that on the intervening night of 11/12.4.1992,
the appellant enticed the prosecutrix to the house of one Sarwan Singh, which is at
some distance, so as to facilitate Ajaib Singh to commit rape upon her.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that keeping in view the fact that the appellant has two daughters, the sentence imposed upon her may be converted
into the period already undergone by her.
Keeping in view the object and the purport for which the provisions of
Section 366 of the I.P.C. was enacted and furthermore in view of the relationship
between the parties, on the basis whereof the prosecutrix must have placed explicit
trust and reliance on her for the purpose of accompanying her in the night to a place
at some distance, i.e. on the pretext that she (appellant) was going to the field for
easing herself, we are of the opinion that no case has been made out for interference
with the quantum of sentence.
The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
(S.B. SINHA)