PRADEEP Vs. STATE NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by a judgment dated 15.05.2013 of learned Addl. Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.06/13 arising out of FIR No. 80/09 PS Mangol Puri by which the appellant Pradeep @ Balli was convicted for committing offences punishable under Sections 458/376/328/506-II IPC and Section 25 Arms Act, the instant appeal has been preferred by him. By an order dated 16.05.2013, he was awarded various prison terms with fine. All the substantive sentences were to operate concurrently.

(2.) Briefly stated, the prosecution case as reflected in the chargesheet was that in February, 2009 and on 06.03.2009 at House No.A-9A, Awantika Enclave, Mangol Puri, Delhi, the appellant after committing house tress-pass and putting the prosecutrix 'X' (assumed name) aged around 16 years in fear committed rape upon her. On 11.04.2009, a country-made pistol loaded with a live cartridge lying in a car bearing No. DL-6CG-0079 parked in front of his flat No.607, pocket-A, Sector-6, Narela was recovered at his instance. On receipt of intimation of the incident on 09.03.2009, Daily Diary (DD) No. 14A (Ex.PW-16/A) came into existence at 10.10 a.m. at PS Mangol Puri. The Investigating Officer, after recording victim's statement (Ex.PW-1/A) lodged First Information Report. 'X' was medically examined; she recorded her 164 Cr.P.C. statement. Statements of the witnesses conversant with the facts were recorded. Exhibits collected during investigation were sent for examination to Forensic Science Laboratory. Efforts were made to apprehend the perpetrator of the crime. The appellant could be arrested on 09.04.2009. Pursuant to his disclosure statement, a country-made pistol was recovered from the car bearing No. DL-6CG-0079. Arvind Kumar (since acquitted) was also implicated for harbouring the appellant. Upon completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against both - the appellant and Arvind Kumar for committing various offences. The prosecution examined thirty-three witnesses to establish its case. In 313 Cr.P.C. statement, the accused persons denied their involvement in the crime and pleaded false implication. DW-1 (Vishal Gaurav) was examined in defence. After hearing the rival contentions of the parties and on appreciation of the evidence, the Trial Court, by the impugned judgment, acquitted Arvind Kumar of the charges. It is relevant to mention that State did not challenge the said acquittal. Being aggrieved by conviction, the appellant has filed the instant appeal.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file. Undisputably, the appellant and the prosecutrix 'X' were acquainted with each other before the incident; the appellant lived in her neighbourhood and carried out business of property-dealing nearby.