NATHU RAM versus STATE OF HARYANA

Citation: [1993] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 415 · Decided: 27-10-1993 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: P.B. SAWANT, S. MOHAN · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

NATHU RAM 
v. 
STATE OF HARYANA 
OCTOBER 27, 1993 
(P.B. SAWANT ANDS. MOHAN, JJ.] 
indian Penal Code, 1860-Sections 354, 376 read with 511-Attempt 
to commit rape-Outraging the modesty of a woman-Patient brought to clinic 
A 
B 
of a private Medical Practitioner for treatment-Patient's relative sent on an C 
e"and-Doctor and another person. attempting rape on the unconscious 
patient-On return of the relative one of the accused runs away-Other ac-
cused caught-Convicted and sentenced-Appeal by one of the accused--Con-
. viction and sentence-Confinned. 
On a complaint filed by P.W.8, F.I~R. was registered against the D 
appellant-accused-2 and accused-1, a private Medical Pnctitioner, under 
Sections 354 and 376 read with Seetion 511 Indian Penal Code. 
The crux of the complaint was ~at the daughter-in-law of P.W.8 was 
suffering from Malaria and was taken to the clinic of accused No.1 for 
treatment. The Doctor gave some tablets and water and asked her to lie E 
down on a cot behind a curtain, and called in the appellant-accused. 
Thereafter, the Doctor asked P.W.8 to bring hot water from outside. When 
he returned with hot water, he found that both the accused had attempted 
to rape his daughter-in-law, who was lying on the cot unconscious and her 
salwar was folded to half the extent. The Doctor was totally naked with p 
only an underwear and the appellant was in his kachha and baniyan. P.W.8 
raised an alarm and the appellant ran away. The Doctor was caught and 
slapped. Some people gathered there and freed the Doctor. 
The trial court convicted and sentenced the accused to 3112 years' 
rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1000 each under Sections 376/511 G 
IPC and in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment 
for 3 months. 
· On appeal, the High Court confirmed the conviction and sentence. 
Against this decision, accused No.2 preferred the present appeal. 
H 
415 
A 
B 
416 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1993] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 
The appellant contended that he had ~othing to do with the alleged 
offence and a false--case had been filed against him and that since the 
occurrence was alleged to have taken place on a Sunday, there was no 
possibility of his going to the clinic. 
Dismissing the appeal, this Court 
HELD : 1. P.W.8 is positive that the Doctor was standing naked while 
the appellant was scantily dressed in his kachha and baniyan. P.W.4 was 
unconscious and her Sa!war had been half folded. Accused Doctor assured 
P.W.8 that he will cure P.W.4 with the help of his Guru who is none else 
C than the appellant. Merely because it happened to be a Sunday, it does not 
mean there was no possibility of th~ appellant not being there. (420-C-E] 
2. There may be minor discrepancies in tire evidence of P.W.8, but 
they are natural. A tutored witness will depose in a parrot-like fashion. In 
any event, these discrepancies are not so material as to reject his tes-
D timony. Above all, the two rustic villager P.W.4 and 8 could not have ever 
thought of foisting a false case, more so when there was admittedly no 
enmity between the appellant and accused No.1 on the one hand and the 
prosecution witnesses on the other. (420-F] 
3. No doubt, C.W .2 would say that no complaint was preferred to 
E 
him by P.W.8 but the positive case of P.W.8 is that he promised to take 
action but he did not do so. Therefore, P.W.8 had to go upto the Chief 
Minister and the higher authorities. It is this relentless pursuit which 
made the police to register the case. (420-G] 
F 
G 
4. The sentence cannot also be called excessive under the circumstan-
ces of the case, when in con1plicity with Accused No.1, the appellant abeted 
the offence of rape. It is not that he was a mere bystander or onlooker. The 
scanty dress clearly will make him fall under the said two sections with 
which he is charged. (420-H & 421-A] 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal appeal No. 
357of1990. 
From the Judgment and order dated 1.11.89 of the Punjab and 
Haryana High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 464-SB of 1988. 
H 
U.R. Lalit and Prem Malhotra for the Appellant. 
..... 
NATHURAMv. STATEOFHARYANA[MOHAN,J.] 
417 
Ms. Renu George and Ms. Indu Malhotra for the Respondent. 
A 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
MOHAN, J. The appellant along with one Dr. Ramesh Kumar was 
sentenced to 3V2 years' rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1,000 each 
under Sections 376/511 of the Indian Penal Code and in default of payment B 
of fine the defaulter w

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.