Delhi District Court
State vs . Ranbir Singh & Anr on 4 February, 2016
IN THE COURT OF SHRI SANJIV JAIN ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE SPECIAL FAST TRACK COURT (SOUTH EAST) SAKET COURTS: NEW DELHI Unique Case ID No. 02406R0112372013 SC No. : 176/13 FIR No. : 382/12 U/s. : 376/511/506 IPC PS : Badarpur, New Delhi. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) ................... Complainant Versus 1. Ranbir Sharma, S/o Sh. Giriraj Singh R/o H. No. 171, Gali No. 3, Panchsheel Colony, Ismailpur. 2. Sunil S/o Sh. Hariram R/o A115, Shivam Colony, Ismailpur, Faridabad. .........................Accused Date of Institution : 17.05.2013 Judgment reserved for orders on : 04.02.2016 Date of pronouncement : 04.02.2016 J U D G M E N T
1. On 14.12.2012, the prosecutrix gave a complaint at the police station Badarpur interalia that she worked as a Sales FIR No. : 382/12 State Vs. Ranbir Singh & anr PS : Badarpur Page No. 1 of 7 Officer at Veer Estate, near Metro Station, Badarpur. She used to look after the payment. The accused Ranbir Sharma offered her and Prabhat to join him in his business. At that time, he did not have any land nor money even to pay to his staff. Ranbir Singh Sharma made an agreement to purchase a land. He asked them to make booking. He offered them commission @ Rs. 100/ per sq. yd. w.e.f. April 2012. They did the booking of the land measuring about 5000 to 6000 sq. yds. When they asked him to settle their accounts, he did not settle nor paid the salary of his staff. He thereafter, started sending obscene messages to her expressing his love for her. She decided to leave the office on 05.06.2012 as he started misbehaving with some other girls. When she left the office, the accused paid her Rs. 15,000/ to settle her accounts. After few months, the customers approached his office for possession / refund. On his request, she again joined his office on 18.11.2012. One day when she was going to washroom, he forcibly caught her and kissed her. When she scolded him, he felt sorry. Whenever, she asked him to settle her account, he threatened her of dire consequences. When she raised voice, she received the call from his brother Sunil who threatened her of dire consequences.
On this complaint, the case was registered u/s FIR No. : 382/12 State Vs. Ranbir Singh & anr PS : Badarpur Page No. 2 of 7 354/506/509/34 IPC. During investigation, she again gave a complaint on 08.01.2013 that on 10.12.2012 at about 2 p.m. / 2:30 p.m., when she had gone to washroom, the accused Ranbir Sharma held her hand and kissed her. When she resisted, he made her fall on the bed, caught her hair and rubbed her body. He tried to pull out her laggings / salwar and lied on her. He put her salwar down and attempted to commit rape. He gagged her mouth and started opening her pant. Somehow, she managed and ran towards the door but it was bolted from inside. When she tried to open the kundi, he again pulled her and threatened to kill her. He again made her fall on the bed and started behaving like an animal saying that he would rape her. She however managed to go to the main office where Prabhat, Ravi and 2 / 3 persons were present. She told the incident to them but by that time, the accused Ranbir Sharma had gone away. He then called her and threatened that he would implicate her in a theft case.
On this complaint, sections 376/511 IPC were added. Both the accused persons were arrested. After the investigation, accused Ranbir Sharma and accused Sunil were sent for trial for the offences punishable u/s 376/511/506 IPC (Ranbir) and u/s 506/509 IPC (Sunil).
FIR No. : 382/12 State Vs. Ranbir Singh & anr PS : Badarpur Page No. 3 of 7
2. After complying with the requirements contemplated u/s 207 Cr.P.C. the case was committed to this Court.
3. After hearing arguments, vide order dated 29.05.2013, prima facie case was made out against the accused Ranbir Sharma u/s 376/511, 506 IPC and against the accused Sunil u/s 506 IPC. The charges were framed against both the accused persons. They pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. To substantiate its case, prosecution examined as many as four witnesses. PW1 HC Parminder Singh registered the case vide FIR Ex. PW 1/A. PW2 HC Nathi Ram recorded DD No. 46B. PW3 HC Vijender handed over the copy of FIR and original rukka to the IO. PW4 Shrankhala has testified on oath that she lives with her husband and two children. She had booked a plot near Barthal, Haryana. She had met the prosecutrix in the office of the property dealer at Badarpur and given her the booking amount for the said plot. She stated that the prosecutrix had told her that in case she wanted to cancel the plot, she could get refund. She stated that after three days, she went to the office but did not find her. She then telephoned the prosecutrix who called her in the police station. She went there and met the prosecutrix but did not FIR No. : 382/12 State Vs. Ranbir Singh & anr PS : Badarpur Page No. 4 of 7 get any money. She stated that on the same day, she received a call from the police station whereby she was asked to come there. She went there with Pratima Devi and again met the prosecutrix who told them that she does not have any money nor she can help them to get their money. She asked them to talk to the dealer. They talked to the dealer and contacted Ashok, brother of the dealer who returned the money after 2 - 3 sittings. She stated that she never met the accused persons and has been seeing them for the first time.
5. In the instant case, summons to the prosecutrix were directed to be served through the DCP but the same received with the report that the address given on the summons is incomplete. It was submitted by the investigating officer that the address mentioned in the chargesheet was given by the prosecutrix and she did not go to the house of the prosecutrix during investigation. She stated that she had contacted the prosecutrix on all the mobile numbers given in the complaints and statements but could not get her whereabouts. IO has also shown her inability to produce her in the witness box. It is relevant to mentioned that earlier also the summons were directed to be served through DCP and on 19.04.2014 unserved report was FIR No. : 382/12 State Vs. Ranbir Singh & anr PS : Badarpur Page No. 5 of 7 received from his office.
6. Perusal of the file reveals that during investigation, the IO did not record the statement of the witness namely Pratima Singh though she has been cited in the list of witnesses. IO clarified that during inquiry, neither Shrankhla / PW4 nor Pratima Devi stated anything incriminating against the accused persons.
7. In the instant case, the star witness was the prosecutrix. She is not traceable. The other witnesses as shown in the list of witnesses came in motion at the instance of the prosecutrix. The four witnesses examined by prosecution did not say anything incriminating against the accused persons. From the prosecutrix only, it could be known that the accused persons were involved in the offences for which they have been charged. In the absence of the testimony of the prosecutrix, I am of the view that necessary ingredients of the offences could not be brought on record. Prosecution evidence was accordingly closed and statements of the accused persons u/s 313 Cr.P.C were dispensed with.
8. In the light of the above discussions and in the absence of any incriminating evidence against the accused Ranbir Sharma and Sunil, they are acquitted of the offences FIR No. : 382/12 State Vs. Ranbir Singh & anr PS : Badarpur Page No. 6 of 7 punishable u/s 376/511 and 506 IPC and 506 IPC respectively. Accused Ranbir Sharma is in judicial custody, he be released forthwith if not required in any other case. Bail bond of accused Sunil is cancelled. His surety is discharged. The accused persons are however, directed to furnish bail bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/ each with one surety each in the like amount, in compliance of section 437A Cr.P.C. The case property if any be confiscated to the State after the expiry of period of appeal or revision.
9. File be consigned to Record Room.
Announced in the open court today i.e. 04.02.2016 (Sanjiv Jain) ASJSpl. FTC / South East Saket Courts, New Delhi.
FIR No. : 382/12 State Vs. Ranbir Singh & anr PS : Badarpur Page No. 7 of 7