NAUSHAD Vs. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant Naushad impugns a judgment dated 20.07.2004 in Sessions Case No. 90/97 arising out of FIR No. 151/97 PS Rajouri Garden by which he was convicted for committing offence under Section 354 IPC. By an order dated 22.07.2004, he was awarded RI for six months with fine Rs. 5,000/-.

(2.) Allegations against the appellant as reflected in the chargesheet were that on 09.03.1995 at about 09.30 P.M. on the roof of House No. F 72, Raghubir Nagar, he attempted to commit rape upon the prosecutrix 'X' (assumed name), aged four years. Intimation about the occurrence was recorded vide Daily Diary (DD) No. 20A at 11.15 P.M. at PS Rajouri Garden on the night intervening 9/10.03.1995. 'X' was taken to hospital for medical examination. The Investigating Officer lodged First Information Report after recording statement of victim's mother Munni Devi (Ex.PW-4/A). The accused was arrested and medically examined. Statement of the witnesses conversant with the facts were recorded. After completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the appellant. The prosecution examined ten witnesses. In 313 statement, the appellant denied his complicity in the crime and pleaded false implication due to non-return of Rs. 8,000/- advanced by him to the victim's mother. DW-1 (Abdul Rehman) appeared in defence. The trial resulted in conviction under Section 354 IPC. It is apt to note that the appellant was not found guilty under Section 376 IPC read with Section 511 IPC and the said acquittal was not challenged by the State.

(3.) The occurrence took place at about 09.30 P.M. Intimation to the police was given without any delay at 11.15 P.M. 'X' was taken for medical examination at around 11.05 P.M. by PCR officials. The alleged history recorded therein describes 'X' a victim of sexual assault. FIR was lodged promptly after recording victim's mother's statement (Ex.PW-4/A) vide rukka (Ex.PW-10/2) sent at around 12.30 night. In the complaint, victim's mother Munni Devi specifically named the appellant to be the perpetrator of the crime. She gave detailed account as to how and under what circumstances, the appellant was found with 'X' on the roof where he had attempted to sexually assault her. Since the FIR was lodged promptly, there was least possibility of the victim's mother to concoct a false story. The complainant Munni Devi expired on 31.05.1999 and could not be produced for examination. Her husband PW-4 (Balram) proved the contents of the complaint (Ex.PW-4/A).