STATE Vs. IMRAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (Oral) - The State has filed the instant appeal to challenge the legality and correctness of a judgment dated 27.11.2012 of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.46/10 arising out of FIR No.121/2007 registered at Police Station Chandni Mahal by which the respondents were acquitted of the charges. The appeal is contested by the respondents.

(2.) Briefly stated, the prosecution case as stated in the charge-sheet was that on 5.4.2007 in between 2.00 p.m. to 9.30 p.m. Imran (R-1) abducted the prosecutrix 'X' (assumed name), aged around 18 years, from her house and took her to a house at Mustafabad where after administering stupefying substance, he committed rape upon her and criminal intimidated her. Further allegations against R-1 were that he forced 'X' to commit suicide by declining to marry her. Salauddin (R-3), Smt.Haseena (R-4) and Irfan (R-5) were implicated to have hatched conspiracy with R-1 to kidnap 'X' from her house knowing that she would be forced or seduced to illicit intercourse with Imran. Allegations against Zakir (R-2) were that on 05.04.2007 at about 4.00 p.m., he administered stupefying substance to 'X' in cold drink and wrongfully confined her in a room knowing that she had been kidnapped/abducted.

(3.) The Investigating Officer lodged FIR after recording victim's statement (Ex.PW-4/1) on 08.04.2007. 'X'was medically examined; she recorded her 164 Crimial P.C. statement. Statements of witnesses conversant with the facts were recorded. The accused persons were arrested. Exhibits collected during investigation were sent for examination to Central Forensic Science Laboratory. Upon completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against R-1 to R-5 in the court for committing various offences. To establish its case, the prosecution examined nineteen witnesses. In 313 statement, the accused persons denied their involvement in the crime. They did not examine any witness in defence. After appreciating the evidence and considering the rival contentions of the parties, the Trial Court by the impugned judgment acquitted the respondents of the charges. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, State has filed the instant appeal.