Delhi District Court
State vs Mr. Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh on 16 October, 2014
-:: 1 ::-
IN THE COURT OF MS. NIVEDITA ANIL SHARMA,
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE
(SPECIAL FAST TRACK COURT)-01,
WEST, TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI
Sessions Case Number : 84/2014.
Unique Case ID Number : 02401R0392082014.
State versus Mr. Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh
Son of Mr.Prem Singh
Resident of Village Ranhola, Delhi.
First Information Report Number : 510/13
Police Station Ranhola
Under sections 376 D/328/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Date of filing of the charge sheet before : 25.07.2014.
the Court of the Metropolitan Magistrate
Date of receipt of file after committal in this : 04.08.2014.
Court of ASJ(SFTC)-01, West, Delhi
Arguments concluded on : 16.10.2014.
Date of judgment : 16.10.2014.
Appearances: Ms. Neelam Narang, Additional Public Prosecutor for the
State.
Accused Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh on bail.
Mr. C.M Sanghwan, counsel for the accused Manpreet @
Monu @ Manvir Singh
Prosecutrix is present with her counsel Mr.B.L Madhukar and
Mr. Rohit Kishore.
Ms.Shubra Mehndiratta and Ms.Poonam Sharma, counsel for
Delhi Commission for Women.
***********************************************************************
Sessions Case Number : 84 of 2014.
Unique Case ID Number : 02401R0392082014.
FIR No. 510/2013, Police Station Ranhla,
Under sections 376 D/328/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
State versus Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh. -:: Page 1 of 10 ::-
-:: 2 ::-
JUDGMENT
1. Mr.Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh, the accused, has been charge sheeted by Police Station Ranhola, Delhi vide supplementary charge sheet for the offence under sections 376D /328/34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the IPC) on the allegations that accused Mr.Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh along with other two accomplices namely Mr. Vipin Lakra @ Sonu and Mr.Satpal (who have been since acquitted vide judgment dated 08.05.2014 in main charge sheet SC No. 21/2014, Unique ID Number-02401R0039452014) on 31.12.2013 at about 11.45 am at Plot Laxmi Park, Ranhola Extension, Phase-I, Delhi administered some stupefying or intoxicating material mixed in a cold drink to the prosecutrix (name mentioned in the file and withheld to protect her identity) with intent to commit the offence of rape on her and thereafter in furtherance of their common intention, he along with the other co-accused ( already acquitted) committed rape upon her.
2. After completion of the investigation, the supplementary charge sheet against accused Mr.Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh was filed before the Court of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate on 25.07.2014 and after its committal, the case has been assigned to this Court of the Additional Sessions Judge (Special Fast Track Court)-01, West, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi for 04.08.2014.
4. After hearing arguments, charge for offence under sections 328/34 IPC read with section 376 D of the IPC was framed against the Sessions Case Number : 84 of 2014.
Unique Case ID Number : 02401R0392082014.
FIR No. 510/2013, Police Station Ranhla, Under sections 376 D/328/34 of the Indian Penal Code. State versus Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh. -:: Page 2 of 10 ::-
-:: 3 ::-
accused Mr.Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh vide order dated 20.08.2014 to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
5. In order to prove its case, the prosecution has examined the prosecutrix as PW1.
6. All the safeguards as per the directions of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court and Hon'ble Supreme Court while recording the statement of the prosecutrix have been taken and the proceedings have been conducted in camera. Guidelines for recording of evidence of vulnerable witness in criminal matters, as approved by the "Committee to monitor proper implementation of several guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court as well as High Court of Delhi for dealing with matters pertaining to sexual offences and child witnesses" have been followed.
7. The prosecutrix, as PW1, has deposed that she has already deposed as a prosecution witness in the main file titled as SC No. 21/2014, titled as State versus Vipin Lakra @ Sonu and others and accused Mr.Vipin Lakra @ Sonu and Mr. Satpal have been acquitted vide judgment dated 07.05.2014 of this Court. She has already deposed that none of the accused persons have committed gang rape upon her after intoxicating her. She had developed friendship with Mr. Vipin Lakra @ Sonu on facebook and subsequently she had physical relations with him several times voluntarily and with her free consent. He has never forced her in any manner to have physical relations with her. She did not have any grievance against accused Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh and she has prayed that he may be Sessions Case Number : 84 of 2014.
Unique Case ID Number : 02401R0392082014.
FIR No. 510/2013, Police Station Ranhla, Under sections 376 D/328/34 of the Indian Penal Code. State versus Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh. -:: Page 3 of 10 ::-
-:: 4 ::-
acquitted. She did not know accused Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh and she has not identified him in the Court. She did not want to say anything else.
8. As the prosecutrix was hostile and had resiled from her earlier statement, the Additional Public Prosecutor has cross-examined her.
9. In her cross examination by the Additional Public Prosecutor for State, the prosecutrix has admitted that she had made a complaint in Police Station Ranhola (Ex. PW1/A). (The complaint was exhibited as Ex.PW1/A in the main file and has been exhibited again in the present supplementary charge sheet ). She voluntarily stated that she had not written anything herself in her complaint. She had called the police at 100 number due to wrong advise of some well wishers and had been taken to the Police Station by some police officers and the complaint had been made by her on wrong advise of some well wishers and due to some misunderstanding. No one has intoxicated and raped her and she had physical relations with Mr.Vipin Lakra @ Sonu voluntarily and with her free consent. She did not know any man in the name of Mr.Satpal and accused Mr. Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh. She had not stated to the police anything which is written in the complaint (Ex.PW1/A) and had not told the police that she was raped after intoxication by Mr.Vipin Lakra @ Sonu, Mr.Satpal and accused Mr.Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh. She has deposed that she did not read the contents of the complaint (Ex.PW1/A) before she put her signatures. She has admitted that she has given her statement before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate (Ex.PW1/B). (The statement under section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Sessions Case Number : 84 of 2014.
Unique Case ID Number : 02401R0392082014.
FIR No. 510/2013, Police Station Ranhla, Under sections 376 D/328/34 of the Indian Penal Code. State versus Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh. -:: Page 4 of 10 ::-
-:: 5 ::-
Code (herein after referred to as the Cr.P.C) was exhibited as Ex.PW1/B in the main file and has been exhibited again in the present supplementary charge sheet). She voluntarily stated that the statement was made to the learned Metropolitan Magistrate due to the wrong advise of some well wishers and due to some misunderstanding. She has denied that statement (Ex.PW1/B) and statement (Ex.PW1/A) were made by her before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate and before police voluntarily and not due to some misunderstanding and at the instance of her well wishers. She has admitted that she was medically examined in SGM hospital. She has voluntarily stated that whatever she had stated to the doctor, it was instance of her well wishers and due to some misunderstanding. She has denied that she had not made any statement before the doctor due to some misunderstanding and whatever had happened with her, she had stated truth. She has further denied that on 31.12.2013 at about 11.45 a.m at plot Laxmi Park, Ranhola Extn. Phase I, Mr.Vipin Lakra @ Sonu and Mr.Satpal (who have been since acquitted vide judgment dated 08.05.2014) along with accused Mr.Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh administered some intoxicating material mixed in a cold drink to her and thereafter committed rape upon her. She has further denied that she was intentionally not identifying the accused Mr.Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh and not supporting the prosecution case as she has been won over by accused. She further denied that she was deposing falsely.
10. She has also been cross examined on behalf of accused Mr. Mr.Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh and admitted that he has not committed any offence. Mr.Vipin Lakra @ Sonu and Mr.Satpal along with Sessions Case Number : 84 of 2014.
Unique Case ID Number : 02401R0392082014.
FIR No. 510/2013, Police Station Ranhla, Under sections 376 D/328/34 of the Indian Penal Code. State versus Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh. -:: Page 5 of 10 ::-
-:: 6 ::-
accused Mr.Manpreet @ Manveer Singh have not intoxicated her nor raped her and accused Mr.Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh is innocent. She has deposed that she has never seen accused Mr.Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh prior to today. She has again prayed that the accused Mr.Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh may be acquitted.
11. The prosecutrix, has not deposed an iota of evidence of her being intoxicated and raped at all. She has not even mentioned the word "rape" in her evidence nor has deposed anything incriminating against the accused Mr.Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh.
12. In the circumstances, as PW1, the prosecutrix, who is the star witness has turned hostile and has not supported the prosecution case and more importantly has not assigned any criminal role to both the accused, the prosecution evidence is closed, declining the request of the Additional Public Prosecutor for leading further evidence, as it shall be futile to record the testimonies of other witnesses, who are formal or official in nature. The precious Court time should not be wasted in recording the evidence of formal or official witnesses when the prosecutrix herself has not supported the prosecution case and is hostile.
13. Statement under section 313 of the Cr.P.C the accused Mr.Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh is dispensed with as there is nothing incriminating against him when the prosecutrix is hostile and nothing material has come forth in her cross examination by the prosecution.
Sessions Case Number : 84 of 2014.
Unique Case ID Number : 02401R0392082014.
FIR No. 510/2013, Police Station Ranhla, Under sections 376 D/328/34 of the Indian Penal Code. State versus Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh. -:: Page 6 of 10 ::-
-:: 7 ::-
14. I have heard arguments at length. I have also given my conscious thought and prolonged consideration to the material on record, relevant provisions of law and the precedents on the point.
15. In the light of the aforesaid nature of deposition of the prosecutrix, PW1, who happens to be the material witnesses, I am of the considered view that her deposition cannot be treated as trustworthy and reliable. Reliance can also be placed upon the judgment reported as Suraj Mal versus The State (Delhi Admn.), AIR 1979 S.C. 1408, wherein it has been observed by the Supreme Court as:
"Where witness make two inconsistent statements in their evidence either at one stage or at two stages, the testimony of such witnesses becomes unreliable and unworthy of credence and in the absence of special circumstances no conviction can be based on the evidence of such witness."
16. Similar view was also taken in the judgment reported as Madari @ Dhiraj & Ors. v. State of Chhattisgarh, 2004(1) C.C. Cases 487.
17. Consequently, no inference can be drawn that the accused Mr.Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh along with other two accomplices Mr. Vipin Lakra @ Sonu and Mr. Satpal (who have been since acquitted vide judgment dated 08.05.2014) are guilty of intoxicating and raping the prosecutrix. There is no material on record to suggest that the prosecutrix was ever intoxicated and raped by the accused Mr.Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh. No case is made out against the accused Mr.Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh as there is no incriminating evidence against him. In fact the prosecutrix has deposed that she has not seen accused Mr.Manpreet Sessions Case Number : 84 of 2014.
Unique Case ID Number : 02401R0392082014.
FIR No. 510/2013, Police Station Ranhla, Under sections 376 D/328/34 of the Indian Penal Code. State versus Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh. -:: Page 7 of 10 ::-
-:: 8 ::-
@ Monu @ Manvir Singh prior to today and she has not identified him. She has even prayed for his acquittal stating that he is innocent.
18. Crucially, the materials and evident on the record do not bridge the gap between "may be true" and must be true" so essential for a Court to cross, while finding the guilty of an accused, particularly in cases where once the prosecutrix has herself claimed that the accused is innocent and has not committed any offence. Even otherwise, no useful purpose would be served by adopting any hyper technical approach in the issue.
19. Consequently, no inference can be drawn that accused Mr. Man- preet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh is guilty of the charged offence under sec- tions 328/34 IPC read with section 376 D IPC. There is no material on record to show that Mr.Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh along with Mr. Vipin Lakra @ Sonu and Mr. Satpal (who have been since acquitted vide judgment dated 08.05.2014) on 31.12.2013 at about 11.45 am at Plot Laxmi Park, Ranhola Extension, Phase-I, Delhi administered some stupefying or intoxi- cating material mixed in a cold drink to the prosecutrix with intent to commit the offence of rape on her and committed rape upon her.
20. From the above discussion, it is clear that the claim of the prose- cution is neither reliable nor believable and is not trustworthy and the prose- cution has failed to establish the offence of intoxication and gang rape against accused . The evidence of the prosecutrix makes it highly improbable that such an incident ever took place.
Sessions Case Number : 84 of 2014.
Unique Case ID Number : 02401R0392082014.
FIR No. 510/2013, Police Station Ranhla, Under sections 376 D/328/34 of the Indian Penal Code. State versus Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh. -:: Page 8 of 10 ::-
-:: 9 ::-
21. Therefore, in view of above discussion, the conscience of this Court is completely satisfied that the prosecution has failed to bring home the charge against the accused Mr.Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh for the offence under sections 328/34 IPC read with section 376D IPC.
22. Consequently, accused Mr.Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh is hereby acquitted of the charge for the offence under sections 328/34 IPC read with section 376 D IPC.
24. Compliance of section 437-A Cr.P.C. is made in the order sheet.
25. Case property be destroyed after expiry of period of limitation of appeal.
26. It would not be out of place to mention here that today there is a public outrage and a hue and cry is being raised everywhere that Courts are not convicting the rape accused. However, no man, accused of rape, can be convicted if the witnesses do not support the prosecution case or give quality evidence, as in the present case where the prosecutrix is hostile, as already discussed above. It should not be ignored that the Court has to confine itself to the ambit of law and the contents of the file as well as the testimonies of the witnesses and is not to be swayed by emotions or reporting in the media.
25. One copy of the judgment be given to the Additional Public Prosecutor, as requested.
Sessions Case Number : 84 of 2014.
Unique Case ID Number : 02401R0392082014.
FIR No. 510/2013, Police Station Ranhla, Under sections 376 D/328/34 of the Indian Penal Code. State versus Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh. -:: Page 9 of 10 ::-
-:: 10 ::-
27. After the completion of formalities and expiry of the period of limitation for appeal, the file be consigned to the record room.
Announced in the open Court on (NIVEDITA ANIL SHARMA) this 16th day of October, 2014. Additional Sessions Judge, (Special Fast Track Court)-01, West, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.
************************************************************** Sessions Case Number : 84 of 2014.
Unique Case ID Number : 02401R0392082014.
FIR No. 510/2013, Police Station Ranhla, Under sections 376 D/328/34 of the Indian Penal Code. State versus Manpreet @ Monu @ Manvir Singh. -:: Page 10 of 10 ::-