PINKI Vs. ANIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Pinki daughter of Murari Lal filed this application under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. for leave to appeal to challenge the judgment dated 10.2.2010 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Bhiwani, in Sessions Case No.77 of 18.12.2009, arising out of private complaint under Sections 376/511/506 IPC.

(2.) By the said judgment, Anil and Manoj, respondents No.1 and 2, were acquitted of the charges levelled against them. Prosecution story, in brief, is that on 8.10.2008, private complaint under Sections 376/511/354/342/506/34 IPC was instituted by the applicant against Anil and Manoj on the allegation that marriage of applicant was solemnised on 29.4.2006 with Manoj. After marriage, inlaws of the applicant started harassing and maltreating her on account of demand of dowry. Private complaint was filed by the applicant and as per order of the Court, FIR No.268 dated 19.7.2008 under Sections 498- A/406/506/323 IPC was registered. During investigation, accused assured the applicant and her family members not to harass her for want of dowry and also filed affidavits in this regard. As per assurance by the in-laws, applicant had gone to her matrimonial house. Manoj had also filed petition for restitution of conjugal rights and had assured to withdraw the said petition but petition was not withdrawn. Again in-laws of the applicant started misbehaving and maltreating the applicant for want of dowry.

(3.) Applicant was confined in a room in the house of Anil. Anil had an evil eye on the applicant. When no one was present in the house, then Anil attempted to rape and outrage the modesty of applicant but she managed to save herself by raising a noise. On 20.9.2008, brother of the applicant came to the house of applicant to take her, then came to know about her illegal confinement in a room in the house of Anil. When family members came to take her, then in-laws of applicant directed them to give an affidavit to pay Rs.1,00,000/-. After that, father of the applicant gave an application to DSP, Bhiwani. As per application, DSP, Bhiwani, directed Incharge, Police Post, Kharak Kalan, to take action. When in-laws of applicant came to know about the application, then they came to leave her at Bhiwani in a private vehicle on 26.9.2008 to avoid registration of a criminal case against them. At about 5.00 PM, they came to the office of DSP, Bhiwani, along with the applicant. Vehicle was stopped at some distance from the office of DSP, Bhiwani, leaving the applicant and Anil in the vehicle. Manoj and others had gone to the office of DSP, Bhiwani. Anil started teasing the applicant and when she resisted and tried to come out of the vehicle, then Anil attempted to rape her. Applicant raised noise. In the meantime, one car came from the front side and on seeing the car, Anil had released the applicant. After some time, Manoj came. Entire occurrence was brought to his notice. But instead of helping the applicant, he started abusing her. They threatened her to eliminate if disclosed about the incident to anybody. Out of fear, occurrence was not brought to the notice of any one. After some days, applicant had disclosed about the incident to her family members and had gone to the police station along with her father, but no action was taken.