Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 19, Cited by 0]

Delhi District Court

State vs 1. Narender Kaushik on 18 November, 2017

                               -: 1 :-




   IN THE COURT OF SH BHUPESH KUMAR, ADDITIONAL
    SESSIONS JUDGE (SPECIAL FAST TRACK COURT)­01,
           WEST, TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI

Sessions Case No. 45/14


State    Versus     1.       NARENDER KAUSHIK
                             S/o Sh. Yashwant Kaushik
                             R/o Gali no.3, Shiv Colony,
                             Kankar Wali Road, Rewari, Haryana. 

                    2.       Harish @ Hari
                             S/o Sant Lal Saini, 
                             r/o H.No.1084A, New Mahabir Colony,
                             Hisar, Haryana.

                    3.       Ashwani Kumar Verma
                             s/o Sh.Jagdish Kumar Verma
                             r/o H.no.589/1, Krishna Nagar,
                             Hissar, Haryana.

                    4.       Boby @ Tuli @ Pinky Verma
                             w/o Vinod Kumar, 
                             r/o WZ 222, Basai Darapur, Delhi.

                    5.       Jyoti @ Bably @ Balli
                             w/o Naresh @ Sonu
                             r/o H. no. 1224, Housing Board, 
                             Hisar, Haryana. 


FIR No. : 142/14
U/s : 370/376D/363/365/34/506/342/323/109 IPC &
         5A ITP Act. 

                                                                   Bhupesh Kumar
                                         ASJ (SFTC)-01, West THC, Delhi/18.11.2017
                                       -: 2 :-



Police Station : Ranhola


DATE OF RECEIPT OF FILE 
AFTER COMMITTAL: 28.03.2014
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 18.11.2017


JUDGMENT 


   1.

The brief facts of the case as emerged from the chargesheet are that on 11.02.2014 the  prosecutrix made written complaint to the Police Commissioner of Delhi with copy to DCP Raouri Garden, SHO   Moti   Nagar,   National   Woman   Commission   etc.   In   the complaint, she has stated to the effect that she is resident of village Lookhi   Doga,   Dak   Khana   Bawaan   Pur,   Thana   Murail,   Zila Veerbhoom, Bengal. She is aged about 26­27 years and is divorcee. Earlier   she   working   at   Asha   Deep,   Nurshing   Home   Jogipur, District Veer Bhoomi. While working in the said nursing home, she came into contact with accused Tuli @ Boby @ Pinky Verma who came there for the medical treatment of her mother. The accused Tuli @ Boby @ Pinky Verma asked the complainant that she can arrange good job for her with good salary at Delhi. On the pretext of arranging job for  prosecutrix, accused Tuli @ Bobby brought prosecutrix Delhi at her house at WZ 222, Basai Darapur, Moti Nagar. There accused Narender, partner of  Tuli @ Boby @ Pinky Verma met her. For some time, accused   Tuli @ Boby @ Pinky Bhupesh Kumar ASJ (SFTC)-01, West THC, Delhi/18.11.2017 -: 3 :- Verma and Narender made the  prosecutrix to do their household work. The prosecutrix handed over her cash and jewelery items to both these accused persons. After some time, prosecutrix came to know that   both these accused persons  have brought some other 'Besahara' girls and forced them into prostitution. When this fact came to the knowledge of  prosecutrix, she made up her mind to return to her home and she demanded her cash and jewelery from both  these   accused   persons.   On  this   both   these   accused   persons became furious and beaten the prosecutrix.  The accused Narender raped prosecutrix number of time and under threat to kill forced for prostitution     and   to   have   sexual   intercourse   with   number   of unknown persons. After three months, accused Babli sister of  Tuli @ Boby @ Pinky Verma came to her house and on looking at the condition of prosecutrix, consoled her and assured her that no such act   shall   be   repeated   in   future.   Thereafter,   Babli   took   the prosecutrix alongwith her to Hisar. But when prosecutrix reached there, she came to know that Babli and her partners Nayan, Hari, Ashwani and Sonu had purchased her from accused  Tuli @ Boby @ Pinky Verma and Narender for a sum of Rs.40,000/­. When this fact was revealed to prosecutrix, she became mentally disturbed. At Hisar, the said accused persons repeatedly raped her and also made her obscene video and photographs. When she was pregnant, even then she was pushed into prostitution and was forced to have sex with   number   of   unknown   persons.   This   act   continued   for   nine months.   On   7.10.2012   she   gave   birth   to   a   baby   girl   at   Gulati Bhupesh Kumar ASJ (SFTC)-01, West THC, Delhi/18.11.2017 -: 4 :- Nursing   Home,   Hisar.   However,   only   after   10­15   days   of   her delivery, under the threat to kill her daughter, she was again forced for prostitution. Thereafter, the prosecutrix became sick as she got infection   in   her   stomach   and   private   parts.   When   the   accused persons came to know that she is no more fit for prostitution, she was thrown out from their house but they kept her daughter with them. Thereafter, a Bengali lady met the prosecutrix who got her medically treated and got her married to one person known to her. The daughter of prosecutrix is still in the possession of accused persons.   Inter alia, on the basis of this complaint, FIR no. 142 dt.19.02.2014 at PS Moti Nagar, u/section 370/376D/363/365 IPC was registered. 

2.   The investigation of the case was marked to SI/IO Sushma. During investigation, prosecutrix was medically examined and her statement   was   recorded   u/section   164   Cr.   P.C.   Accused   1) Narender Kaushik, 2) Harish @ Hari, (3) Ashwin Kumar Verma, (4) Boby @ Tuli @ Pinky Verma, and (5) Bably @ Jyoti @ Balli were   arrested   and   their   disclosure   statement   was   recorded.   The accused were medically examined. The daughter of prosecutrix was recovered and she was directed to keep in Paalna with directions of CWC. 

  After   completing   other   formal   investigation,   charge   sheet   under Section   370/376D/363/365/34/406/405/506/342/323/109   of   IPC   and Section   5   of   ITP   Act   was   filed   before   concerned   Ld.   MM.     After Bhupesh Kumar ASJ (SFTC)-01, West THC, Delhi/18.11.2017 -: 5 :- complying   with   provisions   of   Section   207   Cr.P.C.,   the   case   was committed to Ld. Sessions Court by the Ld. MM.

3. After hearing arguments, vide order dated 22.08.2014,  charge for   offence   under   section   376/323/506/406/370/34   of   IPC   and offence under Section 3,4,5 & 6 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act was framed against the accused Narender Kaushik; charge for offence under section 370/376/506/363/365/34 of IPC and offence under Section 3,4,5 & 6 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act was framed against the accused persons Harish @ Hari and Ashwani Kumar   Verma;   charge   for   offence   under   section 376/109/323/506/406/370/34   of   IPC   and   offence   under   Section 3,4,5 & 6 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act was framed against the   accused   Boby   @   Tuli   @   Pinky   Verma;   charge   for   offence under section 370/376/109/363/365/34 of IPC and offence under Section 3,4,5 & 6 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act was framed against the accused Bably @ Jyoti @ Balli was framed. All accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

4. In   order   to   bring   home   the   guilt   of   accused,   prosecution   has examined nine witnesses. 

5. PW­1 is the prosecutrix. She has deposed to the effect that earlier she was married to Chhotu from whom she has obtained divorce and now married to Mr.Subroto Prabhat. In the year 2007, she was Bhupesh Kumar ASJ (SFTC)-01, West THC, Delhi/18.11.2017 -: 6 :- working at Asha Deep Nursing Home, Veer Bhoom. Accused Tuli came   there   for   treatment   of   her   mother.   After   treatment   of   her mother, accused Tuli enquired from her about her salary to which she told that she was getting Rs.9000/­ per month. At this accused Tuli asked her that she is good worker and she can accompany her for better job in Delhi. She came to Delhi alongwith accused Tuli. At Delhi she worked as maid in the house of accused Tuli. When she asked about her salary, accused Tuli told her that salary would be paid by accused Narener Kaushil. She handed over her jewelery articles i.e. one gold chain, two gold ear rings, one pair of earn ring to   accused   Tuli   @   Boby   @   Pinky   Verma.   After   three   months accused Bably @ Jyoti @ Balli sister of accused Tuli @ Boby @ Pinky Verma came to her house. Accused Bably @ Jyoti @ Balli told her that she would pay whole amount of her salary and cash against   her   jewelery   articles   and   also   asked   the  prosecutrix   to accompany her at Hisar. Prosecutrix accompanied accused  Bably @ Jyoti @ Balli to her house at Hisar, where she worked as maid servant for 7­8 months. Thereafter, she gave birth to baby girl. For some time she worked at the house of accused Bably @ Jyoti @ Balli and when she fell ill she went to a lady in Hisar by leaving her daughter in the custody of accused Bably @ Jyoti @ Balli, at her own. Her daughter was two months old at that time. She lived with that lady for about one week, who also did not pay any money to her. After a week she came back to the house of accused Bably @   Jyoti   @   Balli   and   demanded   her   daughter   back   but   accused Bhupesh Kumar ASJ (SFTC)-01, West THC, Delhi/18.11.2017 -: 7 :- Bably @ Jyoti @ Balli refused to give her  daughter. Thereafter prosecutrix came to bus stand at Hisar, where she met one lady to whom   she   told   about   her   miseries   and   accused   persons   are   not returning back money, jewelery and her daugher. That lady asked her to file case agains accused persons namely Bably @ Jyoti @ Balli,   Boby   @   Tuli   @   Pinky   Verma,   Ashwani   Kumar   Verma, Harish @ Hari and Narender Kaushik. That lady made her to sign papers   and   took   her   to   Tis   Hazari   Court.   She   went   to   police alongwith   her   husband   Mr.Subrato   Mouli   whom   she   married   in Hisar after the delivery of her daughter. The police took her once to the house of accused Boby @ Tuli @ Pinky Verma in Moti Nagar and police apprehended this accused in her presence. The police apprehended the accuses Narender Kaushik from bus stand. Police took her to the house of accused Bably @ Jyoti @ Balli at Hisar, where the accused had the premises. Thereafter all three accused namely Ashwani Kumar Verma, Harish @ Hari and Bably @ Jyoti @ Balli appeared before the police and apprehended by police. Her daughter was handed over to at Moti Nagar, police station. Accused Boby @ Tuli @ Pinky Verma, Bably @ Jyoti @ Balli, Narender Kaushik, Harish @ Hari, Ashwani Kumar were arrested vide memo Ex.PW1/A   to   Ex.   PW1/E   respectively.   She   was   medically examined   by   police   vide   MLC   Ex.   PW1/F.   She   proved   her complaint as Ex. PW1/G. The witness further submitted that her statement  Ex.PW1/H,   u/section   164   Cr.P.C.   was   recorded.     The prosecutrix further submitted that she has told everything to the Ld. Bhupesh Kumar ASJ (SFTC)-01, West THC, Delhi/18.11.2017 -: 8 :- MM. She does not want any punishment for all accused persons. The   witness   was   cross   examined   by  Ld.   APP   for   State   on   the ground that she was resiling from her earlier statement. During her cross­examination by Ld. APP for State, the prosecutrix has not supported the version of prosecution and her statement Ex. PW1/G was confronted from points X2­X3, X4­X5, X6­X7, X8­X9, X10­ X11 and X12­X13. It has been further submitted that whatever she stated before the Ld. MM, it was at her own and voluntarily with her free  consent.  She further submitted that she was told by that lady to depose the facts as stated by her before the Ld. MM to get her money, jewelery and daughter back. Further the prosecutrix has denied   the   suggestions   put   to   her   by   Ld.   APP   for   State   on   the important aspects. 

The   witness   was   cross   examined   by   ld.   Counsel   for   accused   persons. During her cross­examination, she deposed to the effect that she herself has given her daughter to accused Bably @ Jyoti @ Balli as she was unwell   and   could   not   look   after   her   daughter.   She   left   the   house   of accused Bably @ Jyoti @ Balli at her own. Accused Ashwin Kumar and Narender Kaushik are innocent, they have not committed any offence. Accused Harish @ Hari has not thrown out from his house or has not taken her child. She never lived with accused Harish @ Hari. 

6. PW­2 is Ms. Suman. She is the witness who met prosecutrix at Hisar. She has also not supported the version of prosecution. The witness was cross examined by Ld. APP for State but even then the Bhupesh Kumar ASJ (SFTC)-01, West THC, Delhi/18.11.2017 -: 9 :- witness did not depose any against accused person. 

7. PW­3 is Ct. Hansraj who has taken the accused to DDU hospital for medical examination and has proved the exhibits handed over to him by the doctor as Ex. PW3/A. 

8. PW­4 is Ct. Ajita. She has deposed to the effect that she joined the investigation alongwith IO and has arrested the accused persons vide arrest memo Ex. PW1/A to Ex. PW1E. She further deposed that accused Tuli @ Bably @ Jyoti was carrying one girl child in her   arm.   The   prosecutrix   submitted   that   this   girl   child   is   her daughter. The girl Kanika was taken into custody vide Ex. PW4/A. 

9.  PW­5 is Ct.Uma. She made similar deposition to that of Ct. Ajita and further submitted that all five accused persons made disclosure statement as Ex. PW5/C to Ex PW5/G. This witness further proved all   documents   prepared   in   her   presence   viz.   Arrest   memo   and personal search memo etc. 

10. PW­6 is ASI Hari Om. This witness has made similar deposition to that of PW­5 Ct. Uma. He further submitted that accused Bably @ Jyoti @ Balli and Boby @ Tuli @ Pinky Verma were medically examined   through   lady   constable   at   DDU   Hospital.   He   further submitted that he brought the birth certificate of minor girl issued by doctor at Gulati Nursing Home and the name of mother in the Bhupesh Kumar ASJ (SFTC)-01, West THC, Delhi/18.11.2017 -: 10 :- register   was   mentioned   as   Ms.Jyoti   w/o   Mr.Sonu.   The   said document was brought on record as Ex. PW6/C and birth certificate as Ex. P11. 

11. PW­7 SI Sushma has conducted part investigation. She has deposed about   the   investigation   carried   out   by   her   and   identified   all   the documents  prepared  by  her.  She  further   submitted  that after   the sample  was  sent   to  FSL  and  minor   child  was   sent  to  Paalna  at Madipur/Mianwali Nagar, she relieved from the investigation and further investigation was marked to Insp. Kamlesh. 

12. PW­8   is   Inspector   Kamlesh.   She   has   also   carried   out   the investigation of the case. She has deposed qua investigation carried out by her and the document prepared by her. She further submitted that statement of witnesses was recorded and chargsheet was filed in   the   court.   She   further   deposed   that   supplementary   chargsheet was also prepared and filed against accused Naresh @ Sonu. 

13. PW­9 is Ct.Rajbir, who also joined the investigation at the time of arrest of accused persons and arrest memo of all accused persons bears his signature at point F.  PE was closed. 

14. Statement   of   accused   persons   was   recorded   under   Section   313 Cr.P.C. wherein they have denied all the incriminating evidence came on record against them and further submitted that they have Bhupesh Kumar ASJ (SFTC)-01, West THC, Delhi/18.11.2017 -: 11 :- been falsely implicated in this case. All the accused persons except accused Bably @ Jyoti  @ Balli  have not examined any witness in his defence. 

15. DW­1   is   HC   Mohit   Kumar   who   has   proved   the   DD   no.   2   dt. 21.2.2014 and DD no. 21 as Ex. DW1/A and Ex. DW1/B. During his cross examination by Ld. APP for State, the witness submitted that entries are not in his hand writing and he is not aware about said entries. 

16. I have heard the arguments of Sh. Subhash Chauhan, Ld. Addl. PP for   State   as   well   as   Sh.   N.L.Sahai,   ld.   Counsel   for   accused Narender  Kaushik   and   Ashwini   Verma,   Mr.Pradeep   Sharma,   ld. counsel for accused Bobby @ Tuli @ Pinky Verma and Jyoti @ Bably and  Mr.Prasan Aggarwal, ld. Counsel for accused Harish @ Hari.

17. Ld. Addl. PP for State submitted that even though the prosecutrix has not  supported the case of prosecution on certain points, but from the evidence of PW1, the prosecution has succeeded to prove accused  Bobby @ Tuli @ Pinky Verma and co­accused Narender Kaushik   have   misappropriated   the   cash   and   jewelery   items   of prosecutrix which were handed over by prosecutrix to them. The prosecution has also proved that accused Jyoti @ Bably has refused Bhupesh Kumar ASJ (SFTC)-01, West THC, Delhi/18.11.2017 -: 12 :- to return the daughter of prosecutrix to her.  

18.   On   the   other   hand,   ld.   Counsel   for   accused   persons   have submitted   that   PW1/prosecutrix   has   not   supported   the   case   of prosecution at all. In rebuttal to the contentions of ld. APP for State in respect to child of prosecutrix, it is submitted that the prosecutrix during  her   cross­examination   has   submitted   that   she   herself  had given   her   daughter   to   accused   Jyoti     @   Babli   as   she   remained unwell. It has been further submitted that proseuction has failed to prove his case beyond reasonable doubt.  

In   respect   to   misappropriation   of   jewelery   and   cash   amount,   it   is submitted that prosecutrix has denied to have made any such statement to police during her examination­in­chief. On the basis of these submissions prayer has been made to acquit the accused persons by giving benefit of doubt. 

19.  Heard. Material perused. 

20. The testimony of prosecutrix/PW1 has been scrutinized carefully. It is   found   that   she   has   not   supported   the   case   of   prosecution   on material   points   viz.   her   allegation   of   rape,   forcing   her   for prostitution, selling her etc. The witness was cross examined by Ld. APP  for  State  with  permission  of  the  court.  Even  during cross­ examination of this witness/ prosecutrix by Ld. APP for State, she has   not   supported   the   version   of   prosecution   on   all   important aspects. Ld. APP for State has confronted with her earlier statement Bhupesh Kumar ASJ (SFTC)-01, West THC, Delhi/18.11.2017 -: 13 :- Ex. PW1/G but despite this fact, the witness has not supported the version of prosecution.

21. In respect to the allegations of misappropriation of jewelery items of prosecutrix by accused persons Narender Kaushik and Boby @ Tuli @ Pinky Verma in her complaint, it is found that prosecutrix has denied to have made such statement to police. 

22. In respect to allegation that accused Harish @ Hari, Ashwin Kumar Verma and Jyoti @ Bably @ Balli have taken away 1 ½ years old baby Kanika, daughter of prosecutrix from lawful guardianship of prosecutrix   and   confined   her   secretly   at   Hisar,   it   is   found   that prosecutrix   during   her   cross­examination   has   submitted   to   the effect that since she was unwell and was not able to look after her daughter,   she   herself   has   given   her   daughter   baby   Kanika   to accused Jyoti @ Bably. Further she has nowhere deposed that the accused   persons  have   refused   to   hand  over   the  daughter   on  her demand. 

23. In the light of above discussion it is found that the prosecution has failed   to   bring   on   record   clear,   cogent   and   consistent   evidence against the accused persons and it would not be safe to rely upon the   evidence   of   prosecutrix.   Hence,   by   giving   benefit   of   doubt accused Narender Kaushik is acquitted  for offence under section 376/323/506/406/370/34 of IPC and offence under Section 3,4,5 & Bhupesh Kumar ASJ (SFTC)-01, West THC, Delhi/18.11.2017 -: 14 :- 6 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act; accused Harish @ Hari and Ashwani   Kumar   Verma   are   acquitted   for   offence   under   section 370/376/506/363/365/34 of IPC and offence under Section 3,4,5 & 6 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act; accused Boby @ Tuli @ Pinky   Verma   acquitted   for   offence   under   section 376/109/323/506/406/370/34   of   IPC   and   offence   under   Section 3,4,5 & 6 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act; and accused Bably @   Jyoti   @   Balli   acquitted   for   offence   under   section 370/376/109/363/365/34 of IPC and offence under Section 3,4,5 & 6 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act.  As per provisions of 437­A Cr.P.C., bail bonds of accused persons are extended for further six months on the same terms and conditions. 

24. File be consigned to record room.

Announced in the open Court on                 (BHUPESH KUMAR) this 18th November, 2017.                          Additional Sessions Judge,    (Special Fast Track Court)­01,  West, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi Bhupesh Kumar ASJ (SFTC)-01, West THC, Delhi/18.11.2017