MEENU Vs. STATE OF HARYANA & ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is filed by the prosecutrix against the judgment of acquittal recorded by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala dated 07.05.2013 in FIR No.199 dated 19.06.2012 under Sections 376, 384, 451 & 506 IPC, lodged at Police Station Ambala Cantt. on the ground that the prosecution could not prove that the appellant was an unwilling and not a consenting party and thus, gave the benefit of doubt to the accused, Varun Chadha.

(2.) Perusal of the judgment would go on to show that the appellant was married to one Deep Talwar on 03.12.1996 and had studied upto Intermediate and thereafter, improved her educational qualifications and got the degrees of BA, B.Ed, MA, M.Ed, at the cost of her husband. Thereafter, she started a business and opened a boutique which was financed by her father-in-law wherein, she came into contact with the accused who was the neighbour. Due to the objection about the presence of the accused in the shop by her husband and in-laws, she left her matrimonial home for sometime of her married life. From September, 2011, she was residing with her mother due to the separation from her husband whereas her children were residing with her in-laws. She, allegedly, came to Ambala Cantt. in April, 2012 and the accused had seen her, chased and threatened her and then, she had lodged the FIR. The FIR recorded by her reads as under:

(3.) On the basis of the said FIR, the accused was arrested and a DNA examination was also got conducted which confirmed the fact that the accused was the father of the girl child-Ananya who was born in the year 2007. Accordingly, charge was framed against respondent No.2. The prosecution examined as many as 10 witnesses and the defence taken was that there was a voluntary physical relationship with the complainant who had extracted a huge amount from him and when he stopped fulfilling her demands and physical lust, she got lodged the false FIR against him.