STATE NCT OF DELHI Vs. SHALABH GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the instant petition filed under sub-Section (1) of Section 378 Cr.P.C., the State seeks leave to entertain appeal against an order-judgment of acquittal passed by the ld. District Judge/Addl. Sessions Judge (N/E), whereby, the respondent-the accused was acquitted of the charge of rape.

(2.) Concisely, the relevant facts are that on 30.06.2007 at 07:05 hrs, FIR No.264/2007 PS Geeta Colony under Sections 376/506/34 IPC was registered on the complaint made by the prosecutrix for the commission of the offences under Sections 376 and 506 IPC on 27.06.2007 at about 11.00 p.m. on the road on Pontoon Bridge, near Cremation Ground, Geeta Colony. As per the allegations, the prosecutrix had known the accused for the last few years and in February, 2007, he proposed to marry her and on the day of the incident, which was her birthday, he committed rape on her telling her that this was his birthday gift much against her wishes. After the incident, the accused is said to have expressed regrets for about 20 minute and thereafter, both of them went to Atta Bazar Parking at about 11.45 p.m. and from there, the prosecutrix picked up her own car and moved around in insensible condition and did not go back home refusing to attend to the calls received from the family members and even Delhi Police PCR Van searched for her. It was only on the receipt of the message of sickness of her father, she is said to have gone back home but did not narrate the incident and it is only on 29.06.2007 at about 11.00 p.m., she disclosed of the incident to her family members and thereafter only, she came to the police station along with her family members and lodged the complaint. On the conclusion of the investigations, the challan was filed for trial of the offences under Section 376/506/34 IPC. The Trial Court framed charge for the offence under Section 376 IPC, to which the respondent pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. In support of its case, the prosecution examined PW-1 ASI Jagmal Singh; PW-2 Sh. Naresh Kumar, ld. MM; the prosecutrix PW-3; PW-4 HC Subhash; PW-5 Ct. Daya Ram; PW-6 Dr. Virender Kumar; PW-7 Ct. Ranjeet; PW-8 Retd. SI Maha Singh; PW-9 Dr. Kamal Kumar; PW-10 SI Israil Khan-IO and PW-11 HC Mool Chand and closed PE. Incriminating evidence and the circumstances were put to the respondent in his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The respondent however did not lead any defence evidence. Vide the impugned judgment, the respondent was acquitted of the charge under Section 376 IPC.

(3.) What is the perversity in the impugned judgment, which invites grant of leave by this Court, is the pertinent question for consideration in the instant petition.