NARENDER KUMAR Vs. STATE (GNCT OF DELHI)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by a judgment dated 08.07.2015 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.60/2014 arising out of FIR No.129/2014 registered at Police Station Sarai Rohilla whereby the appellant- Narender Kumar was convicted for committing offence punishable under Sec. 376 IPC, the instant appeal has been preferred by him. By an order dated 10.07.2015, he was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for seven years with fine Rs. 5,000.00.

(2.) Briefly stated, the prosecution case, as reflected in the charge-sheet, was that during the period from 3.5.2013 to 20.01.2014 in a rented accommodation at Sarai Rohilla, the appellant committed rape upon the prosecutrix 'X' (changed name) repeatedly; she was forced to abort the pregnancy without her consent and was criminally intimidated. 'X' lodged complaint (Ex.PW-2/A) on 22.01.2014. The Investigating Officer after making endorsement (Ex.PW-5/A) lodged First Information Report. 'X' was medically examined; she recorded her 164 Crimial P.C. statement. Statements of the witnesses conversant with the facts were recorded. The accused was arrested. Upon completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the accused for committing offence punishable under Sections 313/376/494/420/506 IPC. By an order dated 06.09.2014, the accused was charged under Sec. 376(2)(n)/313/506 IPC. In order to establish its case, the prosecution examined ten witnesses besides examining CW-1 (Vidhya Devi). In 313 Crimial P.C. statement, the accused denied his complicity in the crime and pleaded false implication. The trial resulted in his conviction under Sec. 376 IPC. It is apt to note that the acquittal under Sec. 313/506 Penal Code recorded by the Trial court was not challenged by the State. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, the instant appeal has been preferred.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file minutely. The facts are not in dispute. The appellant and the prosecutrix were acquainted with each other. Admittedly, the accused was already married to PW-6 (Uma) on 22.11.2008. PW-6 (Uma) in her testimony before the court disclosed that her marriage was never dissolved. It has further come on record that intimacy developed between the prosecutrix and the accused when 'X's parents took a rented accommodation near Railway Dispensary, Kishan Ganj, Delhi, where the accused used to live. Due to rumors about 'X' affairs with the accused, her parents shifted to House No.283, Gali No.3, Bagh Kade Khan, Kishan Ganj after about two months. It is also not in dispute that subsequently the accused and the prosecutrix got married at Arya Samaj Mandir on 03.05.2013.