TALIB @ DEV Vs. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant Talib @ Dev impugns a judgment dated 02.02.2011 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No. 35/10 arising out of FIR No.216/08 under Sections 363/366/376 IPC PS Sarai Rohilla by which he was held guilty for committing offences punishable under Sections 366/376 IPC. By an order dated 05.02.2011, he was sentenced to undergo RI for four years with fine Rs. 7,000/ - under Section 366 IPC and RI for seven years with fine Rs. 10,000/ - under Section 376 IPC. Both the sentences were to run concurrently.

(2.) ALLEGATIONS against the appellant as reflected in the chargesheet were that on 25.08.2008 after 03.00 P.M. at A Block, Shastri Nagar market, Sarai Rohilla, he kidnapped prosecutrix 'X' and thereafter, took her to his native village. The appellant committed rape upon the prosecutrix there. On 06.09.2008, the appellant was arrested. Statements of the prosecutrix was recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. Statements of the relevant witnesses were recorded. After completion of investigation, a charge -sheet was filed before the Court against the appellant. The appellant pleaded not guilty to the charges and claimed false implication. The prosecution examined thirteen witnesses to bring home the appellant's guilt. In 313 statement, the appellant denied his involvement in the crime. He did not prefer to adduce any evidence in defence. On scrutinizing the evidence and after considering the rival contentions of the parties, the Trial Court, by the impugned judgment, convicted the appellant for the offences mentioned previously. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, he has preferred the instant appeal.

(3.) DURING the course of arguments, learned counsel for the appellant, on instructions, stated at Bar that the appellant has opted not to challenge the findings of the Trial Court on conviction. He, however, prayed to take lenient view as the appellant has served out the substantive sentence awarded to him. Leaned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State has no objection to it.