STATE OF NCT OF DELHI Vs. SUMIT KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State has preferred this appeal upon grant of leave to assail the judgment dated 15.12.2016 rendered by the learned ASJ-01, (Designated Special Court Under The Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act)) District South East, New Delhi, Shri Sunil Chaudhary in Case No. 1434/16, Sessions Case No. 93/13, arising out of FIR No.49/13, registered at PS Kotla Mubarakpur under Section 376IPC and 6 POCSO Act, 2012 against the respondent accused.

(2.) By the impugned judgment the Trial Court has acquitted the respondent accused on the ground that there are contradictions and inconsistencies in the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses which raise a doubt on the case of the prosecution, and probablise the possibility of false implication.

(3.) On 25.02.2013 telephonic information was received by the police at 2.40 PM about "wrong act" being done with a girl, aged 15 years. The information was diarized vide DD No. 21A. Inquiry was assigned to SI Sunil PW1 He along with a lady constable- Pooja PW12 and constable Arvind PW10 reached the address of the prosecutrix where the prosecutrix "S" PW1 along with her mother PW5 met the police party. Accused Sumit was also produced, and they (PW1 and PW5) alleged that the accused had committed "wrong act" with the prosecutrix "S". The accused was apprehended. The statement of the prosecutrix was recorded on 25.02.2013 by SI Rita- PW14 vide Ex. PW1/A. In the said statement, the prosecutrix gave her age as 11 years. She, inter alia, stated that she resides at her given address which was a tenanted premises, along with her parents. She was studying in MCD School in III Class. She stated that her father puts up a fruit rehdi at Sewa Nagar. She has three younger sisters and two brothers. One of her brother is elder to her, while the other brother is the youngest. She stated that about 10 days ago, her father had gone to Mathura for some work. Since he did not return, her mother had gone to bring him back from Mathura. She stated that on 20.02.2013 Wednesday, her brother Rahul PW2 had gone in the afternoon to participate in the Budh Bazar at Sadik Nagar. Since her brother Rahul returns late from Budh Bazar, the prosecutrix and her sisters slept at about 11.00 P.M., leaving the door of the room open. Thereafter, the accused, aged 21 years came over to the house of the prosecutrix. She stated that she knew the accused from before and he used to put up a pan bidi shop on the corner of the street. The accused woke up the prosecutrix and removed her pant. He also removed his pant and thereafter he raped her (did galat kaam with her), which also caused pain to the prosecutrix. She also stated that some hot fluid (garam paani) was released by the accused. Thereafter, the accused gave her Rs. 10/- and told her not to speak about the same to anyone. She stated that her Sister- Divya PW7, aged 7 years, witnessed the incident. The prosecutrix stated that she did not inform about the incident to anyone. On the date when her statement was recorded i.e., 25.02.2013, she informed her mother of the incident. The mother then made a complaint on number 100. Thereafter the police arrived and the accused was apprehended.