PRAMOD MANDAL Vs. STATE (GNCT OF DELHI)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this appeal is a judgment dated 25.11.2013 of learned Addl. Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.07/2013 arising out of FIR No. 225/2012 registered under Sections 376/377 IPC at PS Adarsh Nagar by which the appellant Pramod Mandal was held guilty for commission of offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(f) and 377 IPC. By an order dated 28.11.2013, the appellant was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life with fine Rs. 10,000/- under Section 376(2)(f) IPC and RI for ten years with fine Rs. 5,000/- under Section 377 IPC. Both the sentences were to operate concurrently.

(2.) The perpetrator of the crime in this case is none else but the biological father of the victim 'X' (assumed name) aged around 9 years. The victim used to get her primary education at Janhit Society for Social Welfare, Lal Bagh, Azadpur, Delhi. PW-14 (Devki Sharma), Teacher at the said institution chanced upon injury marks on the victim's body. Finding something amiss, she inquired from the child and came to know that she was being abused by her father. Victim's mother was contacted and informed about the child's plight. Asha Devi - X's mother lodged complaint (Ex.PW-13/A) and FIR (Ex.PW-1/B) came to be recorded at PS Adarsh Nagar. 'X' was medically examined; she recorded her 164 Cr.P.C. statement. The appellant was arrested. Statements of the witnesses conversant with the facts were recorded. Upon completion of investigation, a chargesheet was filed against the appellant in the Court. To establish its case, the prosecution examined sixteen witnesses in all and relied upon several documents. In 313 Cr.P.C. statement, the appellant denied his complicity in the crime and pleaded false implication. The trial resulted in conviction as aforesaid. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, the instant appeal has been preferred.

(3.) We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file minutely. Victim's mother - Asha Devi put the police machinery into motion and lodged complaint (Ex.PW-13/A) on 13.09.2012. In her complaint, she gave detailed account as to how and in what manner the appellant - her husband used to sexually assault her daughter 'X' aged around 9 years in her absence. Specific and definite role was assigned to the appellant in the crime. In 164 Cr.P.C. statement (Ex.PW-4/B) recorded on 15.09.2012, the victim reiterated the version given by her mother in complaint (Ex.PW-13/A). She accused the appellant for committing sexual assault upon her in the absence of her mother. She was threatened not to disclose the incident or else she would be killed. She further informed that the occurrence was narrated by her to her tuition teacher.