STATE Vs. ARVIND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Crl.M.A.8588/2014

(2.) Learned counsel for the State contends that delay in filing of the FIR ought not to be a ground for discarding the testimony of the prosecutrix. The prosecution has placed the record of the telephone calls to show that the prosecutrix and Arvind were working in a factory and had become friends due to which prosecutrix went to the house of Arvind when he forcibly raped her. It is only after the prosecutrix was raped by Arvind even after his marriage that the FIR was lodged, which cannot belittle the offence committed on the prosecutrix. Hence, leave to appeal be granted.

(3.) We have heard learned counsel for the State and perused the record.