SURENDER KUMAR Vs. THE STATE NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment dated 27.05.2005 of learned Additional Sessions Judgment in Sessions Case No. 46/02 arising out of FIR No. 36/02 registered at Police Station Uttam Nagar by which the appellant Surender Kumar @ Shivender was held guilty for committing offence under Section 376 IPC. By an order dated 03.06.2005, he was awarded Rigorous Imprisonment for six and a half years with fine Rs. 20,000/ - under Section 376 IPC.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the prosecution case, as projected in the charge -sheet, was that on 17.01.2002 at about 1:00 p.m. in the upper room situated on the first floor of House No. 144, Village Nawada, the appellant committed rape upon the prosecutrix 'X' (assumed name), aged around 30 years and criminally intimidated her. First Information Report was lodged after recording victim's statement (Ex.PW -1/A). 'X' was medically examined. The accused was arrested; exhibits collected during investigation were sent for examination to Forensic Science Laboratory. Statements of the witnesses conversant with facts were recorded. Upon completion of investigation, a charge -sheet was filed against the appellant in the Court. The prosecution examined nine witnesses to establish its case. In 313 statement, the appellant pleaded false implication and denied his involvement in the crime. The trial resulted in his conviction as aforesaid under Section 376 IPC. It is relevant to note that the petitioner was acquitted of charge under charge 506 IPC and the State did not challenge it.

(3.) IN the instant case, nothing has surfaced as to at what time exactly, the prosecutrix was sexually assaulted. Police machinery was set in motion when information was conveyed about the commission of rape and quarrel recorded vide Daily Dairy (DD) No. 40 -B (Ex.PW -7/A) at 06.10 p.m. on 17.01.2002. In her complaint (Ex.PW -1/A), the victim disclosed that she had gone to the appellant's house at around 1:00 p.m. to play with his daughters. After some time, when the girls were busy in their work, the appellant called her in the upper room of the house. She was pushed on the cot and threatened of dire consequences. The accused committed rape upon her as a result of which she became unconscious. On regaining consciousness, she returned to her house wearing her clothes and narrated the occurrence to her sister -in -law (Meena).