ANU ARORA Vs. THE STATE AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED by the judgment of acquittal passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (hereinafter referred to as trial court) dated 20.03.2006 vide which the respondent no.2 has been acquitted in FIR No. 559/2004, PS Anand Vihar, the complainant Anu Arora (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner) filed the present revision petition to set aside the same and to punish the respondent no.2, as the State has not filed appeal against the acquittal.

(2.) FACTUAL matrix, as emerges from the record, is that on 12.10.2004, the petitioner made a complaint to the police. It was alleged that she was student of class XI; respondent no.2 was employed as a driver; he used to transport the petitioner to school; on 09.03.2004, after completion of final examination, respondent no.2 took along with her on the pretext that he had to give money to his known one whose mother was ill; car was stopped near a flat; petitioner was asked to accompany the respondent no.2 to the flat; respondent no.2 opened the door of the flat; he brought a glass of cold drink; after consuming the same, the petitioner became unconscious; on regaining consciousness the petitioner found herself on a bed in naked condition; respondent no.2 was also standing in naked condition having camera in his hand; petitioner felt pain in her private parts; when petitioner asked the respondent no.2 that she would raise alarm, respondent no.2 told that he had taken nude photographs of the petitioner and would ruin her reputation; due to fear the petitioner did not inform the incident to anyone; petitioner was left in her house; thereafter also the respondent no.2 blackmailed the petitioner and took money from her. On completion of investigation, charge -sheet was filed for offence under Section 363/366/328/376/384/385 IPC. After compliance of provisions of Section 207 Cr.P.C, the learned MM took the cognizance and committed the matter to the Court of Sessions as the matter was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions.

(3.) TO prove its case, the prosecution examined 20 witnesses. After conclusion of prosecution evidence, the statement of respondent no.2 was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in which he has claimed innocence. He had examined 2 defence witnesses to prove his defence. The learned trial court vide judgment dated 20.03.2006 arrived at the decision to not found guilty of the commission of the crime, acquitted the accused /respondent no.2 of the charges framed against him.