BUNTY Vs. STATE OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this appeal is to a judgment dated 20.09.2006 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.104/05 arising out of FIR 35/05 under Section 354/376/511 IPC registered at Police Station Hauz Qazi whereby the appellant Bunty @ Bharat was held guilty for committing offences under Section 354 and 376 read with Section 511 IPC. By an order dated 22.09.2006, the appellant was awarded RI for two years under Section 354 IPC and RI for five years with fine Rs. 2,000/- under Section 376 read with Section 511 IPC. Both the sentences were to operate concurrently.

(2.) The prosecution case as reflected in the charge-sheet was that on 26.01.2005 at around 3:00 p.m., the appellant took the prosecutrix 'X' (assumed name) aged seven years to his house and sexually assaulted her there. FIR under Section 354 IPC was registered on the statement of victim's mother-Kamlesh. The prosecutrix was medically examined. Her statement was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The accused was arrested. Statements of witnesses conversant with the facts were recorded. After completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted in the court against the appellant for commission of the aforesaid offences. To establish its case, the prosecution examined fifteen witnesses in all. Statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded in which he denied the allegations and pleaded false implication. He examined DW-1 (Shiv Dutt) in his defence. After appreciating the evidence and 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, the appellant has preferred the appeal.

(3.) During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the appellant restricted his arguments for conviction of the appellant under Sections 376/511 IPC. He urged that the ingredients of Section 376 read with Section 511 IPC are not attracted in the absence of any material giving definite indication of attempt to rape. The prosecution witnesses have narrated divergent and contradictory statements to prove its case and to bring it within four corners of the said offence.