GARVIT INDORA Vs. STATE NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by a judgment dated 10.10.2014 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.36/14 arising out of FIR No.112/14 under Sections 376/420/506 IPC registered at Police Station Dwarka South by which he was convicted under Section 376/420 IPC, the appellant-Garvit Indora has preferred the instant appeal. By an order dated 15.10.2014, the appellant was awarded RI for five years with fine Rs. 50,000/- under Section 420 IPC and RI for ten years with fine Rs. 50,000/- under Section 376 IPC. Both the sentences were to operate concurrently.

(2.) Allegations against the appellant, as reflected in the chargesheet, were that on 22.01.2013 he contracted second marriage with the prosecutrix "X"(assumed name) concealing the factum of his previous marriage with Jyoti on 29.09.2011. "X" was dishonestly and fraudulently induced to have sexual intercourse with him. Unaware of the appellant's previous marriage, she established physical relations and became pregnant. The appellant criminally intimidated her to abort the child on the promise to marry. A comprehensive complaint (Ex.PW-1/A) dated 24.01.2014 was lodged by the prosecutrix before the SHO Police Station Dwarka South. She gave detailed account as to how and under what circumstances she was cheated by the appellant. The Investigating Officer lodged First Information Report on 28.02.2014. Statements of witnesses conversant with the facts were recorded. "X" was medically examined at Deen Dayal Upadhyay hospital; she recorded her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The accused was arrested and medically examined. After completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was laid before the court against him for committing various offences under Sections 495/420/376/313/506 IPC. By order dated 16.04.2014, the appellant was charged for the said offences to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution examined 13 witnesses to establish the appellant's guilt. In 313 statement, he denied his involvement in the crime and pleaded false implication. He examined himself as DW-1 under Section 315 Cr.P.C. besides examining DW-2 (Naveen Katarya). The trial resulted in his conviction under Section 420/376 IPC as aforesaid. It is pertinent to mention that the appellant was acquitted of the charges under Sections 313/495/506 IPC and the State did not challenge the said acquittal. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, the appellant has preferred the instant appeal.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file. Appellant's conviction under Section 420/376 IPC is primarily based upon the sole testimony of the prosecutrix "X". The said testimony, however, was not considered sufficient to convict the appellant under Section 313/495/506 IPC. In her Court statement as PW-1, the prosecutrix admitted that she and the appellant while working together in M/s Amrapali Coaching Institute, Sector-8, Dwarka had become friends and slowly their friendship turned into love relation. In January, 2013 during Jaipur trip, they solemnized marriage in a temple. After return to Delhi, she went to her parental home and did not inform her family members about the said marriage. In April, 2013 they started living together as husband and wife in a rented house at village Bagdola and had physical relations with consent. Shortly thereafter the accused started keeping distance from her. It enraged her and she lodged a complaint against him (Ex.PW-1/A). She declined to say anything beyond that. Supporting the appellant, she informed that no force was ever used and all had occurred with her will and consent; she did not have any complaint.