AMIT Vs. THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT) DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present appeal is directed against a judgment dated 21.02.2014 of learned Addl. Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No. 46/13 arising out of FIR No.156/12 PS Subhash Place by which the appellant Amit was held guilty for committing offences under Sections 120B IPC; 376 IPC read with Section 120B IPC. By an order dated 22.02.2014, he was sentenced to undergo RI for ten years with fine Rs. 20,000/- under Section 376 IPC read with Section 120B IPC and RI for seven years with fine Rs. 10,000/- under Section 120B IPC. Both the sentences were to operate concurrently.

(2.) Briefly stated, the prosecution case as set up in the chargesheet was that on or before January, 2012 at Delhi, the appellant along with Roshan (facing trial before Juvenile Justice Board), Dharmender (since PO), Kaushlander (since PO) and Narender @ Bakur (since PO) hatched a criminal conspiracy to commit rape upon 'X' (assumed name) aged 19 years. Pursuant to that conspiracy, the appellant committed rape upon 'X' in a room at JJ Colony, Shakurpur in January, 2012 during night time. Subsequently, he handed over X's custody to co-accused persons who committed gang-rape after wrongfully confining in a room throughout the month of January, 2012 besides criminally intimidating her. The police machinery came into motion when exhaustive written complaint dated 18.04.2012 (Ex.PW-15/A) was filed in PS Subhash Place by the prosecutrix. The Investigating Officer lodged First Information Report after making endorsement (Ex.PW-18/A) over it. In the complaint, 'X' gave detailed account as to how and under what circumstances, she was sexually assaulted by the appellant and his associates. 'X' was medically examined; she recorded her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Statements of the witnesses conversant with the facts were recorded. Exhibits collected during investigation were sent for examination to Forensic Science Laboratory. Efforts were made to find out Dharmender, Kaushlander and Narender @ Bakur. However, they remained untraced and were finally declared Proclaimed Offenders. The appellant and Roshan were arrested and medically examined. Roshan claimed juvenility on the day of incident and was sent to face trial before Juvenile Justice Board. After completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the appellant Amit for commission of aforesaid offences to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution examined eighteen witnesses to substantiate its case. In 313 Cr.P.C. statement, the appellant Amit pleaded false implication and denied his involvement in the crime. The trial resulted in his conviction as aforesaid.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file. Appellant's conviction is primarily based upon the sole testimony of 'X' who specifically implicated him for establishing physical relation with her against her wishes. She further deposed that on the pretext to provide her a job, the appellant handed over her to his associates who sexually assaulted her repeatedly in their room throughout the month of January, 2012. She used to remain confined in the said room. One day, when Dharmender, Kaushlander and Narender @ Bakur had gone to their native village and Roshan forgot to lock the room, she managed to escape from there and went to her native place. She developed medical complications and was taken to hospital for treatment. Her bhabhi Mani brought her to Delhi and she narrated the occurrence to her. Thereafter, the instant complaint was lodged with the police.