STATE OF U P Vs. NISHANT GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been proposed by State of U.P. under section 378(3) of Cr.P.C. against judgment of acquittal passed by court of Additional Sessions Judge, fifth, Bareilly, on 9.4.2019 in S.T. No. 1051 of 2013, State Vs. Shivraj and others, u/s 376(2)(E), 376(D), 166B, 201, 202, 506(2) I.P.C., P.S. Prem Nagar, District Bareilly, arising out of Case Crime No. 1066 of 2013.

(2.) Learned AGA argued that the court has convicted Shivraj and Nar Singh and sentenced them for offence punishable u/s 376(2)(E) I.P.C. with ten years R.I. and Rs. 5000/- each and in case of default, one month's additional imprisonment, they have been further sentenced with twenty years imprisonment and fine of Rs. 20,000/- each and in default six months' additional imprisonment for offence punishable u/s 376D I.P.C. with direction for concurrent running of sentences and adjustment of previous imprisonment. But Dr. Nishant, Dr. Shalini, Dr. Dushyant, Manish Vaishnav and Sanket Bali have been acquitted of the charges levelled against them, whereas there was evidence on record with regard to charges framed against them. The trial court failed to appreciate the facts and law brought on record, which resulted this judgment of acquittal of those accused persons. Hence this application with above prayer for grant of leave to appeal.

(3.) From the very perusal of material on record, it is apparent that F.I.R. (Ext Ka1) was got lodged by informant at P.S. Prem Nagar on 16.7.2013 at 19.00 hours and it was with accusation that informant's daughter, aged about 18 years, was serving as attendant of Dr. Shalini Maheshwari at Ganga Sheel Hospital, D.D. Puram, Bareily. On 14.7.2013 (Sunday) she was on her duty when she was summoned by Shivraj attendant of Dr. Nishant Gupta at first floor and when she reached there, she was bolted inside by Nar Singh and Shivraj, they committed rape with her and while being under injury, she was sent back to her home. She narrated the occurrence then matter was communicated to Dr. Shalini Maheshwari through telephone, the injured was taken to hospital and she was put under treatment. Then after threat for opening leap and making complaint to police was extended. He tried to get case lodged on 15.7.2013, but owing to pressure exercised by accused, it could not be lodged and ultimately it was lodged on 16.7.2013. There was persistent threat by Dr. Shalini Maheshwari and Dr. Nishant Gupta. Meaning thereby accusation of commission of rape was against two employees of hospital concerned. No allegation against remaining accused persons was there till registration of F.I.R. except extension of persistent threat and it was not said in the report that it was threat of dire consequences and threat of not treating or providing medical help. Rather the same is the statement of victim u/s 164 Cr.P.C. in which specific accusation of rape is against Shivraj and attempt to commit rape is against Narsingh. But there is variance. Victim has said that she informed her parent on telephone and her father came there and she was treated by Dr. Nishant. Dr. Shalini was very affectionate to the victim. Hence after appreciating all facts, the essential ingredients for the charges levelled against them were not proved by the prosecution and the trial court came to the conclusion that essential ingredients for the aforesaid charges levelled against them were not made out. Hence they were acquitted of the charges levelled against them vide impugned judgment. Overall appreciation of facts and circumstances and reasoning given by the trial court, there appears no illegality or irregularity in the impugned judgment. Hence this application lacks merit.