MANOJ Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellant Manoj has been convicted by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Delhi in Sessions Case No.33/2002 in FIR No.361/2002 under Sections 376/452/506/342/323 IPC, PS Hauz Khas for committing the offence punishable under Sections 451/342/376/506 IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for one year with fine of Rs.500 and in default to undergo SI for one week for committing the offence punishable under Section 451 IPC, to undergo RI for six month for committing the offence punishable under Section 342 IPC, to undergo RI for seven years with fine of Rs.5000/ - and in default to undergo SI for six months for committing the offence punishable under Section 376 IPC and to undergo RI for two years for committing the offence punishable under Section 506 IPC and all the sentences were ordered to be run concurrently.

(2.) THE prosecution case against the Appellant is based on the statement of Prosecutrix 'S' (name of the Prosecutrix withheld to conceal her identity) which found basis of registration of FIR No.361/2002 under Sections 376/452/506/342/323 IPC, PS Hauz Khas (Ex.PW11/A) . The time and date of incident has been recorded to be about 2.00 am on the night intervening 7/8 -6 -2002 whereas FIR has been recorded on 08.06.2002 at about 10.05 PM. The distance of place of occurrence and the Police Station has been reported to be one furlong in the North direction. The Prosecutrix, aged about 19 years, was working as maid servant at House No.A -59, Hauz Khas, New Delhi. On the night of occurrence, she alongwith three other servants was sleeping on the roof top. During night, one person caught her and when she woke up, she noticed that she had been caught by Guard of the adjoining house No.A - 60, whom she had seen earlier in a uniform and working as watchman. At that time, he was only in underwear and baniyan. She raised alarm and tried to run but he caught her from the right hand. She tried to hold the wire on the wall but he lifted her and threw her on the adjoining roof. Thereafter, he also came on the roof of A -60. She raised alarm calling the other three servants by their names but nobody woke up. She was dragged by the Appellant through the staircase and brought on the middle floor where she was pushed in a room and raped twice. Thereafter the Appellant brought her upto the roof of A -59 where she was sleeping. She went to the toilet and when she returned, she found that Appellant Manoj had already left. She was reluctant to wake up the other servant Shobit and continued lying there till morning. During the day time, while she was doing household work, as she was weeping, servant Mahavir asked her as to why she was weeping. Then she narrated the entire incident to him who disclosed the same to other servant Ravinder and Ravinder disclosed the same to lady of the house. The lady of the house then told her husband. Thereafter her employer made inquiries from the Guard of the adjoining house and it was revealed that the name of the Guard, who committed rape on her, was Manoj Kumar, Then she alongwith her employer came to the Police Station and made her statement Ex.PW4/A and thereafter FIR was registered. During investigation, the Appellant was arrested, the Prosecutrix as well as the Appellant were subjected to medical examination and the exhibits were sent to FSL. After completion of investigation, the chargesheet was filed against the Appellant for the offences complained of.

(3.) THE learned Trial Court, believing the testimony of the Prosecutrix to be convincing and inspiring confidence and plea of consent being not taken by the Appellant and the fact that the Complainant did not even know the name of the Appellant till it was inquired after the occurrence, considered it to be a case proved by the Prosecution beyond reasonable doubt. Thus, while convicting the Appellant for committing the offences punishable under Sections 376/452/506/342/323 IPC, sentenced him in the manner stated above.