Delhi District Court
State vs 1) Vikram Singh on 16 September, 2015
In the Court of Ms. Kaveri Baweja
Additional Sessions Judge Special FTC - 2 (Central)
Tis Hazari Courts: Delhi.
Sessions Case No. : 63/2014
Unique ID No. : 02401R0398002014
State versus 1) Vikram Singh
S/o Sh. Lakhi Singh
R/o Village Chatia Oliya,
Distt. Sonipat, Haryana
2) Mangal Singh
S/o Alam Singh
R/o Village Badmalik,
P.S. Rai Distt. Sonepat,
Haryana.
Case arising out of:
FIR No. : 305/2014
Police Station : I.P. Estate
Under Section : 328/365/376/384/506/120B/34 IPC
Judgment reserved on : 07.09.2015
Judgment pronounced on : 16.09.2015
JUDGMENT
PROSECUTION CASE:
1. The case in hand was registered on the basis of complaint made by the complainant 'B' (name withheld in order to protect her identity) wherein she stated that she has been residing along with her family and her parents at village Holambi Khurd, Delhi and that she is suffering from psychiatric problem for which she is receiving treatment from G.B.Pant Hospital for the last 1213 years.
2. The complainant further alleged in her complaint that in the first week of April, 2014, when she had gone to take medicines at G.B.Pant Hospital, accused Vikram Singh, with whom she had got engaged earlier, which has been broken now, met him at Gate No.8 of G.P.Pant Hospital.
He was present there along with accused Mangal Singh made her consume tea which was laced with some intoxicant. After consuming the same, she lost her consciousness. Thereafter, when accused Vikram caught hold of her hand and forced her to sit in a TSR, she started shouting and many persons gathered at the spot. But accused Vikram Singh showed her medical prescription to the public persons stating that she is his wife and that as she is undergoing treatment for mental ailment, she is doing so. Thereafter, all the persons left the spot. Then she started feeling giddy.
3. Complainant further alleged that upon regaining her consciousness, she found herself in a room and realized that accused Vikram Singh had committed rape upon her. On asking accused Vikram Singh as to why he did so with her, accused Mangal Singh who was also present there, asked her remain keep quite as they had clicked her nude photographs and threatened her not to raise any alarm otherwise they would circulate her said nude photographs in his relations and would defame her and her family. Thereafter, both the accused left her at the byepass at G.T.Karnal Road at about 89 PM. When she inquired about the area, she learnt that it was Trans Yamuna. She did not disclosed about this incident to anyone at home due to the threats extended by the Accused persons.
4. Complainant 'B' further alleged in her complaint that thereafter Accused Vikram Singh started calling her on phone and demanded Rs. 10,000/ from her by extending threats that in case she would not give him the money, she would have to face the dire consequences. After few days, accused Mangal Singh called her on her mobile to come at Sonepat and assured her that he will help her and assured her of justice as Vikram Singh had committed wrong with her. When complainant reached Sonepat, accused Mangal Singh again asked her to reach his village at Chatiya, Sonepat. Upon reaching the said village Chatiya, accused Mangal Singh did not meet her. Thereafter, she met Sh.Lakhi Singh, father of accused Vikram Singh, who called her brother, Surinder Singh and informed him that she had came to Village Chatiya and accordingly her brother Surinder Singh took her back to her village. Thereafter, upon inquiry from her brother, she narrated the entire incident to him. Thereafter, when Surinder Singh asked as to why they had did so, Vikram Singh, Mangal Singh (Jija of Mangal Singh), Lakhi Singh (father of Vikram Singh) and Gurmeet Singh (son of Tau of accused Vikram) had threatened him to kill her family members.
5. On the basis of the aforesaid complaint, the case in hand was registered against the Accused persons. During the course of investigation, the complainant was got medically examined at LNJP Hospital and the exhibits so received from the hospital after examination, were taken into police possession and were seized thereafter. Site plan was also prepared at the instance of Prosecutrix. Prosecutrix was also produced before the learned MM, who recorded her statement under Section 164 Cr.PC.
6. During the course of investigation, on 30.07.2015 accused Vikram Singh and Mangal Singh appeared at PS Rai Distt. Sonepat, Haryana, where they were duly interrogated and thereafter arrested in this case by the IO of this case. Their disclosure statements were got recorded and potency test of both the accused was also got conducted. Thereafter, both the accused were produced before the court, which ordered for their Judicial Custody.
7. During the course of further investigation, statements of witnesses were also recorded, exhibits were sent to FSL for examination. Lakhi Singh, father of accused Vikram Singh and Gurmeet Singh, who is son of 'Tau' of accused Vikram Singh were placed in Column No.12 of the charge sheet in the absence of sufficient evidence qua them. Thereafter, after completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed before the court. CHARGES :
8. Upon committal of the case and on the basis of material on record, accused Mangal Singh and Vikram Singh were charged for offences punishable under Sections 328/366/34 IPC. In addition thereto, accused Vikram Singh was charged separately for the offences punishable under Sections 376/506/384 IPC. Both the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial when the charges were read over and explained to them. PUBLIC WITNESSES:
9. Prosecutrix 'B' was examined as PW2 during the course of trial. Her testimony shall be discussed in detail later on in the course of the judgment.
10. Brother of Prosecutrix namely 'SS' (name withheld) was examined as PW4. He deposed that about 2021 years ago, his sister Beena was got engaged to him, but due to certain reasons, the engagement was broken. Thereafter, her sister Beena was got married to Atlas Singh R/o Gharonda. He further deposed that her sister was undergoing treatment for mental ailment since last 1012 years.
11. He also deposed that on 21.07.2014, he was called by Lakhi Singh, father of accused Vikram Singh, who informed him that Beena is present at their village i.e. village Chatiya Oliya near Sonepat and he asked him to take back his sister. He along with his other family members went to village Chatiya Oliya and brought Beena with them to their house. When he asked his sister about the reason of her going to village Chatiya Oliya, she told him that on 07.04.2014 when she went to G. B. Pant Hospital for her treatment, accused Vikram Singh along with his jija namely Mangal Singh met her there. His sister i.e. Prosecutrix further told him that both the accused gave her tea and after consuming it, she became semiconscious and they forcibly made her sit in a TSR and when she raised alarm, public persons gathered there, but accused Vikram Singh told public persons that she is his wife and she has mental problem and they both took her to a place somewhere at Yamuna Paar and accused Vikram Singh committed rape upon her. His sister further told him that accused persons threatened her that if she discloses about the incident to anyone, they will defame her in the society as they have prepared her obscene video and photographs. His sister further told him that accused persons made her sit in a TSR and then she came back to his house. She further told him that she was called by accused Mangal Singh on 21.07.2014 stating that he will help her in apprehending accused Vikram Singh and to get her justice and asked her to come at village Chatiya Oliya. His sister further told him that accused Vikram Singh asked his sister to give Rs. 10,000/ to him, otherwise he will defame her in the society.
12. PW4 further deposed that he made complaint to the father of accused Vikram Singh about the incident, but the father of accused and his family members threatened him to kill, if they make complaint to anyone. Thereafter, he took his sister to PS Shahbad Dairy but due to jurisdiction issue, they were asked to go to PS I. P. Estate. Police recorded statement of his sister and got registered the case.
13. PW3 is Dr.Shilpi Gutpa, who conducted the gynecological examination of the Prosecutrix on 24.07.2014 after obtaining her consent and proved the same as Ex.PW3/A.
14. Remaining witnesses pertain to investigation which include Duty Officer HC Paramjeet Singh, who was examined as PW1. He deposed regarding recording of the FIR on 24.07.2014 and proved the computerized copy of the same as Ex.PW1/A and his subsequent endorsement on the same as Ex.PW1/B.
15. Ct.Gagandeep was examined as PW5. He deposed regarding taking of sealed exhibits, sample seal, FSL Form and other relevant documents vide RC No.46/21/14 from Malkhana on 06.08.2014 on the directions of the IO and depositing of the same in FSL Rohini. He further deposed regarding handing over the copy of its acknowledgment to MHC(M).
16. PW6 is IO/SI Vishambhari. She deposed regarding the investigation conducted by her in this case. She recorded the statement of the Prosecutrix Ex.PW2/A, prepared the rukka on the said statement and got recorded the FIR. She also got the Prosecutrix medically examined vide MLC Ex.PW6/B and her gynecological examination conducted vide MLC Ex.PW3/A. Thereafter, she collected the MLCs and some sealed exhibits from the hospital, which she seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW6/C.
17. PW6 also prepared the site plan (Ex.PW2/PX) and also got the statement under Section 164 Cr.PC of the Prosecutrix recorded. She also recorded the statements of the other witnesses.
18. PW6 further deposed regarding the arrest of accused Vikram Singh and Mangal Singh vide arrest memos Ex.PW6/D and Ex.PW6/E respectively as well as conducting of their personal search vide memos Ex.PW6/F and Ex.PW6/G respectively. She also prepared the pointing out memos at the instance of accused as Ex.PW6/H and Ex.PW6/I. She further deposed regarding conducting of medical examination of accused Vikram as well as his potency test vide MLC Ex.PW6/J and seizure of the sealed exhibits thereto vide memo Ex.PW6/K.
19. PW6 further deposed regarding getting deposited the exhibits at FSL, Rohini though Ct.Gagandeep, preparation of the charge sheet, recording of statements of witnesses and filing of the charge sheet before the court pending FSL result. She lastly deposed that later on she collected the FSL result (Ex.PW6/L) and filed the same in the court. STATEMENT OF ACCUSED PERSONS UNDER SECTION 313 Cr.P.C.:
20. In their respective statements recorded under Section 313 CrPC, both Accused pleaded innocence and their false implication in this case. Accused Vikram Singh stated that he has been falsely implicated at the instance of brother of Prosecutrix and their Advocates and that no incident of rape, as alleged by the Prosecutrix, ever took place. He further stated that his father had sold a plot for Rs.20 lakhs and brother of the Prosecutrix had taken loan of Rs.2 lakhs saying that he will return the same along with interest, but when he was asked to return the loan, he falsely implicated him in this case through his sister.
21. On the other hand, accused Mangal Singh stated that he has been implicated in this case being a relative of accused Vikram Singh.
22. Both the accused did not lead any evidence in their defence. ARGUMENTS, ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS :
23. I have considered the submissions of learned defence counsels for the accused and learned Addl. PP for the State and have gone through the record of the case in its entirety. I have also considered the relevant case law cited during the course of final arguments.
24. As stated hereinabove, accused Vikram Singh and Mangal Singh are facing trial for having administered intoxicant to the Prosecutrix 'B' at Gate No.8 of G.B.Pant Hospital in the first week of April, 2014 in order that she may be abducted and forced to have illicit intercourse and have thus been charged for offence punishable under Sections 324/366/34 IPC.
25. Besides this, accused Vikram Singh is also charged for having committed rape upon the Prosecutrix, criminally intimidating her and for extorting Rs.2500/ from her out of Rs.10,000/ as demanded by him. He has thus been separately charged for having committed offence punishable under Sections376/506/384 IPC.
26. In the facts and circumstances of the case there can be no doubt that the most important witness of the Prosecution in this case is none other than the Prosecutrix 'B', who has been examined on record as PW2. It is an admitted case of both the accused as well as Prosecution that the Prosecutrix was undergoing treatment for a mental ailment from G.B.Pant Hospital.
27. It may be worthwhile to mention at the very outset, that during the course of proceedings, vide order dated 10.11.2014, the Prosecutrix was referred to Medical Board, IHBAS in order to ascertain whether she is able to depose before the court or not. A report dated 04.12.2014 was received from Medical Board, IHBAS stating that the Prosecutrix is "suffering from 'Obsessive Compulsive Disorder'. However, there is nothing to suggest that she is unfit to give her statement in court".
28. Prosecutrix 'B' deposed that about 56 months ago, she had gone to G.B.Pant Hospital for her treatment and when she came out from the hospital at about 22:30 PM, she met accused Vikram Singh and accused Mangal Singh. She further deposed that accused Vikram Singh caught hold of her hand and then both the accused persons forced her to sit in the TSR which was standing nearby. Thereafter, both the accused forced her to consume tea in the TSR. She started shouting and came out of the TSR and tried to escape from there. Many public persons gathered at the spot but accused Vikram but accused Vikram Singh showed her medical prescription to the public persons stating that she is his wife and that she is undergoing treatment for mental ailment. She further deposed that thereafter she started feeling giddy and both the accused made her sit in the TSR again and took her to a room at an unknown place. It is further the claim of PW2 that accused Vikram Singh committed rape upon her in that room while accused Mangal Singh was standing outside the room. When she regained some consciousness, both of them again made her sit in a TSR and dropped her near byepass at G.T.Karnal Road. She did not disclose about the incident to anyone in her house as the accused persons had threatened her that they will harm her reputation by showing her objectionable video recording to her relatives.
29. The Prosecutrix further deposed that after about 10 days, accused Vikram Singh called her at his mobile phone and demanded Rs. 10,000/ from her by threatening that if she do not give him the money, he will show her recording to her relatives and defame her. She gave him Rs. 2500/, which was the school fee of her daughter. After few days, accused Mangal Singh called her on her mobile and assured her that he will help her as accused Vikram Singh has committed grave wrong with her. He also asked her to meet him at Rohtak but she did not go there as she did not have any trust on him. Thereafter, accused Mangal Singh asked him to come to village Chatia, Sonepat, while assuring her that he will help her get justice. She went there to meet him but accused Mangal Singh did not meet her there. She met Lakhi Singh, father of accused Vikram Singh, who called her brother and informed him that she have gone to Village Chatiya. Her brother brought her back to her village. Thereafter, she narrated the entire incident to her brother and the case in hand was registered vide complaint Ex.PW2/A.
30. A careful perusal of the crossexamination of PW1, however, reveals that she cannot be termed as a reliable and trustworthy witness. Upon stepping into the witness box for her crossexamination, she changed her stand and deposed that it is only Vikram Singh who had forced her to consume tea in the TSR on the day when they both allegedly abducted from in front of Gate No.8 of G.B.Pant Hospital. She was questioned about her changed versions and she answered that it is only accused Vikram Singh, who had forced her to consume tea. As accused Mangal Singh was standing near him, she thought that he had also forced her to consume tea. The witness further clarified that this is because of the mental ailment from which she is suffering.
31. However, as aforesaid, her medical report as per Medical Board, IHBAS, does not support her version with respect to clarification for her changing stand. As per the report of the concerned Medical Board, the witness was fit to depose in court.
32. Upon being further crossexamined on 12.03.2015, the witness again changed her version and deposed that accused Mangal Singh was not present when she was made to sit in the TSR and that he did not accompany her in the TSR on that day. A court question was again put to the Prosecutrix/PW2 to clarify from her earlier version and she again stated that "Mangal Singh was present in the TSR and I was able to see him despite my intoxicated state." However, on the same day, in her further crossexamination, PW2 again deposed that "I cannot say whether Mangal Singh accompanied me to any place on that day."
33. The aforesaid statements made by the Prosecutrix/PW2, thus clearly demonstrate that her testimony is far from convincing as she has been changing her versions time and again claiming that it is due to her mental ailment. It is further noteworthy that initially it is the claim of the Prosecutrix that accused Mangal Singh called her not once but twice and on the first occasion he asked her to meet him at Rohtak and on the second occasion he called her to come to village Chatiya, Sonepat. In her cross examination, however, PW2 admitted that Accused Mangal Singh never talked to her on telephone either on the day of incident or thereafter. She further admitted that Mangal Singh did not call her to any place on that day or thereafter.
34. In the light of the aforesaid statement of Prosecutrix, the entire caes of the Prosecution that she was called by accused Mangal Singh on the pretext of getting her justice, completely stands demolished. Even otherwise, it hardly appeals to reason that an alleged rape victim would agree to go from her own village, admittedly without informing her family members, to meet coaccused of the offence and that too in the village of the main culprit i.e. Village Chatiya, Sonepat, where accused Vikram Singh is admittedly residing. Interestingly, it has also come in the crossexamination of her brother PW4 that the Prosecutrix also took alone two of her children when she went to the village Chatiya, Sonepat. This conduct of the Prosecutrix is totally unexplainable and creates a serious doubt about the veracity of her claim.
35. During the course of arguments, my attention was also drawn to the crossexamination of PW4, brother of Prosecutrix, who stated that the complaint of Prosecutrix i.e. Ex.PW2/A was got written by their lawyer and it is in the handwriting of the Advocate. He also deposed that thereafter they took the complaint Ex.PW2/A to PS I.P. Estate. In the same breath, the witness again stated that the complaint Ex.PW2/A is not in handwriting of the Advocate and voluntarily added that "My Advocate was dictating the complaint and it was being typed by typist." The witness again changed his version and deposed yet again that complaint Ex.PW2/A was got written at PS I.P. Estate by police officials, who recorded it after making inquiries from his sister 'B'. PW4 further deposed that he do not remember if the typed complaint was given as PS I.P. Estate or not and his Advocate has also accompanied them to the PS.
36. I also find on going through the record of the case that even though it is the case of the Prosecution since beginning that the Prosecutrix was called by accused Mangal Singh on her mobile phone and he asked her to come firstly at Rohtak and thereafter at village Chatiya, Sonepat, yet no effort was made to bring on record the CDRs of the mobile phone of the victim. Moreover, the scientific evidence brought on record by way of DNA result Ex.PW6/L also does not support the case of the Prosecution. CONCLUSION :
37. In the light of the above observations and considering the fact that the testimony of the Prosecutrix herself does not fall into the category of credible and trustworthy evidence, both the accused, in my opinion, cannot be convicted for the offences for which they have been facing trial. Prosecutrix has been taking different stands time and again as discussed hereinabove and has been inconsistent in her versions, thus entitling both the accused benefit of doubt as her testimony is riddled with infirmities and creates a serious doubt about its veracities.
38. I am supported in my view by the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court, cited by the learned defence counsel in the course of arguments, titled as Munna vs. State of M.P., 2014 Legal Eagle (SC) 688. Similar observations have been made by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgment titled as Radhu vs. State of M.P., 2007 Legal Eagle (SC) 1018.
39. Accused Vikram Singh and Mangal Singh, in the light of the above discussion thus, cannot be convicted on the basis of evidence led on record in the course of this trial. Consequently, Accused Vikram Singh S/o Sh.Lakhi Singh and Mangal Singh S/o Sh.Alam Singh are hereby acquitted of the offences with which they were charged. They be released forthwith if not required in any other case. File be consigned to Record Room.
Announced in the open Court on 16th day of September, 2015.
(Kaveri Baweja) Additional Sessions Judge Special FTC2 (Central) Tis Hazari Courts: Delhi.