STATE Vs. SANJAY KUMAR & ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a leave to appeal filed by the State against the judgment dated 07.08.2007 passed by Sh. Bharat Parashar, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi in respect of case SC No. 155/2006 pertaining to FIR No. 1265/2005, under Section 363/ 366/ 34 IPC and 376 IPC read with Section 109 IPC, registered by P.S. Nangloi, New Delhi. Briefly stated the facts of the case leading to the filing of the present appeal are that one Shankar Shah was residing at H. No. C-218, Nangli Vihar, Extn. Part-1, Near Shiv Mandir, Vilalge Baprola, Delhi along with his family consisting of four children and wife. The respondent no. 1/Sanjay Kumar was also residing in the said house along with his wife and a small daughter. On 23.12.2005, at about 8.00 AM one Leela daughter of Shanker Shah aged about 12 years (name of the prosecutrix has been changed) left for her school. However, when she allegedly reached near Kakrola Mor, the respondent no.1/Sanjay Kumar met her and he told her that he will get her married with his brother-in-law. It has been alleged that since Leela refused, Sanjay Kumar forcibly made her to sit in a bus and took her to Shahdara and in the way he threatened her of dire consequences. At Shahdara, Sanjay Kumar handed over the custody of the prosecutrix to his father/Om Prakash who took her to Barot in the house of his sister, where they stayed in the night. In the night, Om Prakash had sexually intercourse with the minor girl against her wishes and consent. It has been alleged that the prosecutrix made a call from Barot to his father, however, the telephone was disconnected.

(2.) So far as Shankar Shah is concerned, he lodged originally a missing report about his daughter wherein he mentioned that he suspected the involvement of Sanjay Kumar/respondent no. 1 in the episode. Sanjay Kumar was apprehended by the police and during the investigation, he disclosed all the facts and took the police party to Barot and from there the prosecutrix was recovered. The statement of the prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded. The accused/Om Prakash was also arrested. The prosecutrix was got medically examined at Sanjay Gandhi Memorial Hospital. Their undergarments, semen and blood samples were collected and sent for examination to FSL. After completion of investigation, the charge sheet was filed under Section 363/ 366/ 376/ 34 IPC against both the accused persons. The prosecution has examined nine witnesses in order to prove the case. The statement of the accused persons were recorded who denied their involvement in the commission of any offence. They also examined DW-1/Rakesh and DW-2/Naresh in support of their defence.

(3.) The learned Trial Court after analyzing the testimony of all these witnesses and hearing the arguments acquitted the accused persons on the ground that the prosecution was not able to prove the guilt of the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt as there was no corroboration from any scientific or medical evidence on record.