ISAF Vs. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE appeals are directed against the judgment dated 21st May 2008, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge ('ASJ') convicting the Appellants for the offence under Sections 328/354/380/506/34 IPC, and additionally convicting the Appellant in Criminal Appeal No. ('Crl. A.No') . 691/2008, for the offence under Section 411 of the Indian Penal Code, 1889 ('IPC') , and the order on sentence dated 22nd May 2008, whereby under Section 328/34 IPC they were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment ('RI') for four years and to pay a fine of Rs.500 each and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment ('SI') for one year. For the offence under Section 354/34 IPC, the Appellants were sentenced to undergo RI for one year and for the offence under Section 380/34 IPC they were sentenced to undergo RI for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.300 each and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo SI for six months. For the offence under Section 506, Part II/34 IPC, they were further sentenced to undergo RI for three years. The Appellant Makisu was sentenced to undergo RI for 18 months for the offence under Section 411 IPC. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution is that the Complainant (PW -2) , a young married woman, on 5th November 2002 was crossing the ring road at Maharani Bagh when she read a hoarding on which it was written "Sabhi samasyon ka samadhan" and the name of 'Baba Sahil' was also written. According to PW -2 she was in difficulty since her husband was facing financial problems in his business. She decided to enter the place on which the hoarding was put up, which was on the first floor of a building in Kilokari Chowk. According to PW -2, a girl was sitting at the counter and she made payment of Rs. 51/ -. When PW -2 went inside, there were other persons also present. She found Makisu (A -1) and confided in him her problems. A -1 assured her that she would recover and that he would treat her. He then called the other two accused Mohd. Isaf (A -2) and Irfar Ali (A -3) . On being asked by A -1, A -2 and A -3 brought out a paper on which something was written in saffron colour. Thereafter, they brought a glass of water and that piece of paper was put in the glass of water. PW -2 was asked to drink that water. When she hesitated, they caught her hand and threatened her that in case she refused to drink, her family members would falsely be implicated. According to PW -2, after drinking the water she felt giddiness. The three accused removed her gold ear rings (jhumkas) . PW -2 claimed that she somehow managed to escape from the accused. She is supposed to have got treatment at three places thereafter. She stated that she did not immediately disclose to her family members about the incident as she was afraid of the accused and was terrified. After three days PW -2 gathered courage and confided in her husband . They went to the police on 9th November 2002 and gave a written complaint (Ex.PW2/A) .

(3.) ONLY four witnesses were examined by the prosecution. The accused in their statements under Section 313 Cr PC claimed to be falsely implicated. A -1 stated that he was arrested by the police from Maharani Bagh Chowk. A -3 Irfan Ali stated that at the time of arrest he was with A -1 and A -2. He had only come to meet A -1 who was his bahnoi (brother -in -law) . The accused examined Chunwa (DW -1) , a friend of A - 3, in their defence. DW -1 confirmed that A -3 and A -1 were related.