Delhi District Court
State vs . Madan Lal on 26 May, 2012
State Vs. Madan Lal
IN THE COURT OF MS. SHELLY ARORA: METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE (MAHILA COURT): DWARKA, NEW DELHI
STATE VS. MADAN LAL
FIR NO.207/04
PS Delhi Cantt.
Date of Institution of case : 18.09.2004
Date on which case reserved : 21.05.2012
for judgment
Date of judgment : 26.05.2012
JUDGMENT U/S 355 Cr. P.C.
a)Date of offence : In between 22.06.2004 to
24.06.2004
b)Offence complained of : 420 IPC, 354 IPC and
506 (I) IPC.
c)Name of accused, his parentage : Madan Lal, S/o Chhajju
Ram R/o RZE-668/15
B, Gali No.18 C-1,
Sadh Nagar II, New
Delhi.
d)Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty.
BREIF REASONS FOR DECISION :
"Isse jo pani niklega weh tere pet
ka dard hoga"
This sentence reflects upon mental
perversity of the maker and sheer ig
FIR No.207/04 PS Delhi Cantt. 1/31
State Vs. Madan Lal
norance of the receiver which forms
the crux of entire case. This case re
flects upon the easy objectification of
women playing foul with innocent
faith and belief of people. It is so com
mon still uncontempolatable, reveal
ing the helpless vulnerability of wom
an. It is a sad and unfortunate
episode offering so much to learn pon
der and understand. It is high time
that our wisdom raises from slumber
and we become free in the true sense.
1.Accused Madan Lal @ Baba has been sent to face trial on the allega- tions that he had dishonestly cheated one Meena and induced her to deliver Rs.5,000/- to him on the pretext of getting her daughter in law Meenakshi cured who thereby, had put the complainant Meena to the wrongful promise or assurance which he did not keep, causing loss to the tune of Rs.5,000/-, himself wrongfully gaining the same amount thereby committed an offence punishable u/s 420 IPC. Further, he also allegedly assaulted and used criminal force against the complainant Meenakshi by compelling her to hold and stimulate his male organ FIR No.207/04 PS Delhi Cantt. 2/31 State Vs. Madan Lal and also touched upon her body inclusive specifically of her private parts with an intention to outrage her modesty and thereby committed an offence punishable u/s 354 IPC. Accused also allegedly threatened Meenakshi to follow what he says else her brother would be killed threatening and alarming her and thereby committed an offence pun- ishable u/s 506 (I) IPC.
2. The case of prosecution in brief is as follows :
Meenakshi who is the complainant in the present matter got married on 05.05.2004 and had come to reside at her in laws place at Shankar Vihar in the month of June at the request of her mother in law to assist her in taking care of her husband, who recently had met with an acci- dent as her Gauna had not taken place after marriage, more specifical- ly at the time of incident. Complainant Meenakshi had problem of stomach ache about which she divulged to her mother in law, who spoke about it to one of her neighbourer Sapna who advised her moth- er in law to have consultation with Baba Ji who is the accused in the present matter who can cure, as per the statement of Sapna any and every disease. She alongwith her mother in law had visited the ac- cused person who also then started visiting their home.
3. On one such visit, accused person, on the pretext of curing the ailment of Meenakshi, came to her house and took her and her mother in law into a room where he asked Meenakshi to lie down on the floor and covered her body with a sheet while he asked her mother in law to stand facing towards the wall with a glass of water in her hand. Ac- cused then put her hand through the sheet, touched upon the various FIR No.207/04 PS Delhi Cantt. 3/31 State Vs. Madan Lal body parts of Meenakshi inclusive of her private parts and had also compelled Meenakshi to hold his private male organ (Penis) and stim- ulate the same saying that "Isse jo pani niklega weh tere pet ka dard hoga". Accused also allegedly threatened complainant Meenakshi not to reveal this act to anyone, else his brother would die. He continued repeating the same act for 3 days after which Meenakshi revealed the details of the incident to her own relative who had come to see her at her in laws place who then informed the police about the incident.
4. Complaint in this matter was given in the police station upon which present case FIR was ordered to be registered. Accused was arrested in this case during the process of investigation. Statements of witness- es were also recorded. After conclusion of necessary investigation, charge sheet in the matter was filed, upon which cognizance was tak- en by Ld. Predecessor of this Court.
5. Charge for the commission of offence punishable u/s 420 IPC, 354 IPC and 506 (I) IPC was framed against the accused vide order dated 04.10.2004 passed by this court to which he had pleaded not guilty and claimed trial instead.
6. Matter was then listed for prosecution evidence. Prosecution in support of its case has examined seven witnesses. In defence, accused Madan Lal had examined himself u/s 315 CrPC as a wit- ness.
7. PW-1 is Meenakshi who deposed that she alongwith her mother in FIR No.207/04 PS Delhi Cantt. 4/31 State Vs. Madan Lal law on advise of Sapna, a neighbourer, had approached the accused person who was a self proclaimed spiritual Baba offering to cure ev- ery disease. She further deposed that her mother in law had ap- proached the accused for curing the ailment of her stomach ache and also for receipt of some disputed amount from the office of her father in law. She deposed that accused started visiting her house giving an assurance to her mother in law about the desired outcomes. She fur- ther deposed that accused, on one such visit to her in laws place had asked her to lie down and cover her body with a sheet while asking her mother in law to stand with a glass of water in her hand facing the wall. She further deposed that the accused had put his hand inside the sheet, touched her all over the body and also fondled her private parts and then made complainant Meenakshi hold his own male organ di- recting her to massage and stimulate the same to take out "water" from the penis which would be the cure for the ailment for stomach ache and also threatened her not to reveal this to anyone else her brother would die. She further deposed that this act of accused was re- peated on different occasions but there was no improvement in her stomach pain. She further deposed that she ended up narrating the se- quence of events to her near relative who had come to see her at her in laws place, after which the police was alerted and informed. She proved her complaint made to the police as Ex-PW1/A bearing her signature at point A. She also deposed that accused took an amount of Rs.5,000/- from her mother in law as fees for getting the desired out- come which never happened.
8. PW 1 Meenakshi in her cross-examination by counsel for the accused FIR No.207/04 PS Delhi Cantt. 5/31 State Vs. Madan Lal person stated that he did not remember the exact dates of visits made by the accused person at the residence of her in laws. She also admit- ted that the residence was at servant quarters of a Military Officer where a Visitor's Register was also maintained further submitting that it was not unlikely for any person to enter inside without noting de- tails in register telling the name of a person whom he wanted to meet without making any entry in such register. She admitted that she had not given any specific date of incident in her complaint filed before the court. She also stated that she did not raise any alarm while she was being molested by the accused person as she was threatened by the accused person not to raise alarm. She also stated that she did not reveal about the incident to anyone for 3 days. She stated that Rs. 5,000/- was handed over by her mother in law to accused person in her presence. She declined the suggestion that the accused had never visit- ed her residence and never gave her any treatment.
9. PW 2 is Sapna W/o Mohan who deposed to have taken the treatment from the accused person at the servant quarters of one of her acquain- tance namely Janaki Devi at Shankar Vihar as her husband was job- less and she also had suffered miscarriage. She deposed to have ad- vised Meena for approaching accused person for treatment of ailment of her daughter in law and also for getting rid of other problems she was facing. She also deposed that accused had admitted Rs.5,000/- from her also for treatment which she refused to pay on becoming sus- picious of activities of the accused person. She was not put to cross- examination despite opportunity.
FIR No.207/04 PS Delhi Cantt. 6/31
State Vs. Madan Lal
10.PW 3 is ASI Virender Parkash who proved the copy of FIR recorded by her as Ex-PW3/A and the endorsement as Ex-PW3/B. He was put to cross examination by the counsel for accused person.
11.PW 4 is HC Narender Kumar who was with IO SI Vivek Maheshwari and witnessed complainant Meenakshi identify accused Madan Lal who was then arrested by the IO vide Arrest Memo Ex-PW1/B and Personal Search Memo Ex-PW1/C. He was not put to cross-ex- amination despite opportunity.
12.PW 5 is Ct. Karamveer Singh who deposed to have witnessed the recording of statement of witnesses Meena, Meenakshi and Daniel u/s 161 CrPC. He was put to cross-examination by the counsel for ac- cused person.
13.PW 6 is SI Vivek Maheshwari who proved the rukka as Ex-PW6/A prepared by him on the basis of the complaint of the complainant for the registration of FIR. He deposed to have arrested the accused in the presence of complainant Meenakshi and Ct. Narender vide Arrest Memo Ex-PW1/B and conducted his personal search vide Personal Search Memo Ex-PW1/C. He was also put to cross-examination by the counsel for accused.
14.PW 7 is ASI Azad Singh who prepared the charge sheet and filed the same in the court. In cross-examination by counsel for accused per- son, he stated that he did not record the statement of any person resid- ing in neighborhood other than those of Meena, Meenakshi and Daniel. He also admitted that the area where Meena lived was a Mili-
FIR No.207/04 PS Delhi Cantt. 7/31
State Vs. Madan Lal
tary area.
15.Prosecution evidence was then concluded. Incriminating evidence ap- pearing on record was then put to the accused person u/s 313 CrPC who stated that there was a property dispute between him- self and Janki Devi who was very well acquainted with Meena who all conspired to impute false allegations against him. He stated that he was not present in Delhi at the alleged time and date of incident being in Rajasthan for the entire month of June, 2004 in connection of seri- ous illness of his cousin brother who later died and he happened to come back to Delhi only after 15 days of death of his cousin brother. Accused chose to present himself as a witness in the present matter u/s 315 CrPC.
16.DW 1 is accused Madan Lal himself u/s 315 CrPC who stated that he had introduced Janaki Devi to one property dealer regarding the plot in Rohini where some dispute ensued between the two because of which he has been impleaded by Janaki Devi in this false case. He also deposed that he was in Rajasthan for entire month of June and came back to Delhi only after 15 days of death of his cousin brother. In cross examination by Ld. APP, he stated that he has not filed any document in the court relating to the death of his relative during the month of June, 2004 in respect of which he went to Rajasthan. He stated that Janaki Devi was known to her through a relative of hers who was acquainted with her but Sapna was not known to her. He de- clined the suggestion that there was no property dispute between the property dealer and Janaki Devi with respect to a plot in Rohini and as FIR No.207/04 PS Delhi Cantt. 8/31 State Vs. Madan Lal such, it was just a concocted defence projected to save himself. He further denied that he even visited the house of Meena on the pretext of curing the disease of Meenakshi where he compelled Meenakshi to hold his private organ to stimulate the same which would then cure her disease. He denied the suggestion that he had fled away from his house on 29.06.2004 on realizing that police was about to arrest him.
17.Final arguments were advanced by Ld. APP as well as by Ld. De- fence Counsel.
18.Ld. APP has argued that accused person has nowhere taken a defence that he never acted as a mystical, mythical, karmic and spiritual heal- er, further noting that the case draws its strength from the clear testi- mony of PW1 Meenakshi which process the case of prosecution against accused person beyond reasonable doubt. He also argued that accused could not place on record any document to show that he was not in Delhi at the alleged time and date of incident in question. He has termed the defence of accused a total sham praying for convicting the accused.
19.Ld. Defence counsel has argued that prosecution has failed to exam- ine several key prosecution witnesses without any explanation. He has termed the prosecution case fallacious praying for acquittal of accused person.
20.I have considered the rival contentions weighing them against the ma-
FIR No.207/04 PS Delhi Cantt. 9/31
State Vs. Madan Lal
terial / evidence on record.
21.The list of witness reflect the names of Meena, Manju, Janaki and Daniel Lal as prosecution public witnesses related with the events in basic complaint of this case. At the outset, it is important to mention and note that these above named witnesses had left their addresses with no fresh whereabouts, therefore, could not be traced and exam- ined. It is also significant to note that all these were residing in tempo- rary Servant Quarters allowed at the mercy of the employer and thus, their non-traceability after so many years of incident must not attract much awe with no particular inference against the case of prosecution.
22.Prosecution has to prove its case on the basis of cogent evidence led on record and therefore, there can not be any assumption or presump- tion about the tilting of evidence in favour of any side.
23.Prosecution has examined complainant Meenakshi as first Prosecu- tion Witness (PW1). Before proceeding to analyse the deposition of PW 1 Meenakshi, it is important to reflect upon her social back- ground. Meenakshi belongs to lower and poor strata of society bereft of much social exposure. The background defines her sense of belief, perceptions and her understanding of relativity of correctness of any step.
24.Meenakshi in her complaint to police which she proved in
Court as Ex-PW1/A explained what she went through at
FIR No.207/04 PS Delhi Cantt. 10/31
State Vs. Madan Lal
the hands of accused person. PW 1 Meenakshi has narrated
those details in consistency and symphony with her complaint to po- lice.
25.PW 1 Meenakshi has testified in no uncertain terms in a discreet man- ner as to how and through what channel and purpose did she come in contact with accused person who was impressed to be blessed with mystical powers, which sense of belief he abused by indecently and deliberately touching upon the private body parts of Meenakshi and also by compelling her to massage / stimulate his penis telling her that "water" or "semen" (as it is called by witness) from the stimulation of penis would cure her stomach ache.
26.Meenakshi was married at the time of incident but still was not per- manently brought to her matrimonial home as her "Gauna" was sup- posed to take place after 3 years. She was called for 7 days by her mother in law to her quarter to assist her for the care of her husband who had met with an accident recently. Meenakshi, thus was not a regular permanent member of the family at the time of incident. She was married only about a month ago and was called in by her mother in law for a specific purpose. She can be presumed to have her own reservations thus with her mother in law as well as with her husband at the time of incident in question.
27.Meenakshi has deposed that she did visit qualified doctors for her stomach ache which she contracted before her marriage and which persisted after her marriage. Meenakshi ended up divulging this to her FIR No.207/04 PS Delhi Cantt. 11/31 State Vs. Madan Lal mother in law who discussed the same with Sapna, another lady living in neighborhood. It was Sapna who had introduced the mother in law Meena and complainant Meenakshi to Self Proclaimed Spiritual Heal- er. Sapna has been examined as PW 2 in the matter who has testified having so done, emphatically stressing that accused used to proclaim himself as "Baba" cultivating belief in the minds of people that he had the treatments of all odds in life. She also claimed to have got in con- tact with accused through one Janki Devi whom accused also ac- knowledged to be acquainted with.
28.PW 1 Meenakshi has narrated about the act and conduct of accused with cogency, clarity, consistency and precision. She has been put to thorough cross examination also but defence failed to cull out any sig- nificant contradiction. PW 1 Meenakshi has been satisfactorily able to respond to the questions put forth to her during her cross examination.
29.Meenakshi who barely knew anyone in the locality trusted what her mother in law told her who also in turn was lured in to false beliefs. There were others also like Meenakshi who frequently used to visit the accused person which put Sapna, Meena and Meenakshi also in whirl of superstition for quick, easy and painless alleviation of various problems of their life.
30.Accused was put across in his statement u/s 313 CrPC what Meenakshi and Sapna deposed about him to which he claimed alibi stating that he was not available in Delhi for the entire month of June, 2004. He claimed that he was in Rajasthan to FIR No.207/04 PS Delhi Cantt. 12/31 State Vs. Madan Lal attend to his ailing cousin brother who later died after few days and whose death ceremonies were attended by him. He emphasized upon the same version in his defence evidence when he himself chose to stand in the witness box u/s 315 CrPC. He termed the allegations against him as false and motivated arising to take re- venge for a property deal going astray between himself and Janaki whose name interestingly figured in the testimony of PW 2 Sapna.
31.Discussing the legal premise and scope of such defence of "Alibi". The plea of "Alibi" from Sec -
tion 11 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The word 'alibi' is latin origin and means 'elsewhere'. It is a convenient term used for the defence taken by an accused that when the occurrence took place, he was so far away from the place of oc-
currence that it is highly improbable that he would have participated in the crime. It is a rule of evidence recognized in Section 11 of Evi-
dence Act that facts which are inconsistent with the fact in issue are relevant. The burden of proving commission of offence by the accused so as to fasten the liability of guilt on him re-
FIR No.207/04 PS Delhi Cantt. 13/31
State Vs. Madan Lal
mains on the prosecution and would not be less-
ened by the mere fact that the accused had adopt-
ed the defence of alibi. The burden of proof of alibi is always on the accused who must prove it to the satisfaction of court, to raise a credible doubt in the prosecution version, with absolute certainty so as to exclude the possibility of presence of the person concerned at the place of occurrence, for which he has to lead positive ev-
idence.
32.Putting the principles noted above to the defence taken, interestingly, it is noted that accused did not specify the identity of cousin brother who had died. He did not specify the exact details of place in Ra- jasthan where he visited. He has not even placed on record the Death Certificate of his cousin brother, whom, he claimed had died. Accused has not been able to draw any credit with respect to his plea of alibi taken in defence.
33.Qua the other defence qua motive etc. taken by accused, no sugges- tion was put to PW 1 Meenakshi in her cross-examination about her complaint being motivated by any means or that it was only because of failed property transaction between accused and one Janaki Devi.
FIR No.207/04 PS Delhi Cantt. 14/31
State Vs. Madan Lal
Accused, nowhere denied being professing himself to be blessed with mystical and spiritual powers claiming to alleviate the miseries of peo- ple. He has not given details that of any property dispute in issue be- tween himself and Janaki Devi.
34.Ld. Defence counsel claimed that the prosecution witnesses who have not been examined would indeed have deposed in favour of accused person. Had it been so, nothing stopped the accused from producing those witnesses in the Court. The defence put forth by accused person lacks credibility and plausibility. The defence has failed to carve any doubt in the worthwhileness of the version of prosecution.
35.Meenakshi was a lady who as such had no direct concern with ac- cused person. She had a medical problem. The self proclaimed prophecy of accused lured many into his trap. Illiterate women were easy victims. Accused claimed that he had mystical spiritual powers and has been endowed with ability to suggest remedies and so- lutions for all problems in life which was sufficient to attract helpless, innocent and illiterate women who did not have the wisdom and un- derstanding to correctly judge the act and conduct of their "Baba", to see through what their "Baba" was upto. It stemmed from the blind faith they started having in "Baba" which soon cultivated and nurtured superstition giving "Baba" means and courage to fiddle with them to satiate his own ill desires.
36.There is absolutely no reason as to why the testimony of PW 1 Meenakshi should not be believed by court. Her expressions, sequen-
FIR No.207/04 PS Delhi Cantt. 15/31
State Vs. Madan Lal
tiality, explanation of circumstances as well as the act of accused per- son borne plausibility, consistency and clarity. It is not understandable as to why Janaki would end up using Meenakshi to avenge her proper- ty dispute. Other prosecution witnesses had shifted their addresses and thus could not be traced to compel their appearance in the court. Com- plaint made to police has been proved. The factum of introduction of accused to mother in law of complainant has been also deposed about and proved. Further, PW 1 Meenakshi has also explained as to how she mustered up courage to reveal to her relation about the act of ac- cused person. It is understandable that Meenakshi considering her educational and social background would have taken sometime to even understand what indeed was being done to her and that said act was immoral, illegal and unacceptable. The faith which her mother in law purportedly had put in accused also would have stopped her from divulging the details to her mother in law. Meenakshi was new to the place, to the home and to the people living there. The atmosphere in the house of mother in law must also have been conservative. Accused as per her testimony repeated the same act more than once. At last, she confided in her own relation with whom she was comfortable and matter was immediately reported to police.
37.Accused has been charged with commission of offence punishable u/s 420 IPC, Section 354 IPC and Section 506 (I) IPC.
38.The legal ingredients necessary to constitute offence punishable u/s 420 IPC are enunciated herein : -
FIR No.207/04 PS Delhi Cantt. 16/31
State Vs. Madan Lal
Section 420 IPC deals with the
cases of cheating whereby the
deceived person is dishonestly
induced :
(i) to deliver any property to
any person, or
(ii) to make, alter or destroy
(a) the whole or any part of a
valuable security
(b) anything which is signed
or sealed and which is capa-
ble of being converted in to a
valuable security.
39.Accused allegedly had taken money of Rs.5,000/- from Meena, the mother in law of PW 1 Meenakshi. Same has been deposed about by Meenakshi also but Meena never appeared in witness box to testify about the exact details as to how she was lured or compelled to han- dover Rs.5,000/- for a gain which accused knew was not in his capac- ity to give to Meena and thus, dishonestly cheated Meena. As the ex- act details have not been proved by Prosecution and main witness not examined, the culpability with respect to commission of offence pun-
FIR No.207/04 PS Delhi Cantt. 17/31
State Vs. Madan Lal
ishable u/s 420 IPC can not be established against the accused person.
40.The legal position with respect to offence punishable u/s 354 CrPC is unenunciated herein below : -
In order to bring home charge
under Section 354 IPC, the pros-
ecution has to prove -
(i) that the victim concerned
belonged to fair sex - whatever
her age may be
(ii) that the accused subjected
her to assault as defined in
Section 351 of Indian Penal Code
or to criminal force as defined
in Section 350 IPC and
(iii) the accused while commit-
ting assault or using criminal
force intended to outrage the
modesty of the woman or knowing
it to likely that thereby her
FIR No.207/04 PS Delhi Cantt. 18/31
State Vs. Madan Lal
modesty would be outraged.
41.A person is said to use force when he causes mo-
tion or change or motion or cessation of motion to another person or the above in substance which brings it in to contact with any part of the oth-
er person's body or with anything that the other is wearing or carrying or with anything so situ-
ated that such contact affects other's sense of feeling. This should be done by his own bodily power or by use of some substance or by inducing any animal to change this motion. The use of force will become criminal when it is done against the consent of any person with the inten-
tion of committing an offence or to cause injury, fear or intention of committing an offence or to cause injury, fear or annoyance to any person.
42.Any act which adversely affects the modesty of a woman or is offensive to the sense of modesty, decency or repugnant to womanly virtues or pro-
FIR No.207/04 PS Delhi Cantt. 19/31
State Vs. Madan Lal
priety of behaviour would be an outrage or insult to modesty of a woman.
43.In the Oxford English Dictionary (1933 Edition), the meaning of word "modesty" is given as - " Wom-
anly propriety of behaviour, scrupulous chastity of thought, speech and conduct (in men or women) reserver or sense or sense of shame proceeding from instinctive aversion to impure or coarse suggestion". Thus, the word modesty within the meaning of Section 354 IPC does not refer to a particular woman but to the accepted notions of womanly behaviour and conduct as an attribute as-
sociated with female human beings as a class, be-
ing a virtue which attaches to female on account of her sex.
44.In this case, the woman was lured and frightened into a state of action desired by the accused.
The complainant Meenakshi can not be said to be a FIR No.207/04 PS Delhi Cantt. 20/31 State Vs. Madan Lal consenting party. She can not be said to be asso-
ciated with desire of act in question. She was made to do something for an apparent purpose of gratification of senses by accused person. Com-
plainant was alarmed, shocked, frightened and also threatened thus she would not show physical immediate desistance but it finally came when she revealed the details of gory incident to her re-
lation.
45.The act of accused forcibly under a false sense of belief making the complainant hold and stimu-
late his male organ was a designed methodology where woman was merely a pawn and an actor enact-
ing under the intention, vision and direction of Director who is the accused in this case. Accused also touched upon the body of complainant inclu-
sive of her private parts. The act proven to have been committed by accused is highly offensive and reprehensible and perverse. The virtue of propri-
FIR No.207/04 PS Delhi Cantt. 21/31
State Vs. Madan Lal
ety of behaviour has been blown in to shackles in this case. The act also reflects upon the perver-
sity of intentions of the accused who literally coined everything crushing the innocent but doomed belief of people in to his mystics just to gratify his desires and senses.
46.Prosecution has successfully and convincingly prove its version with respect to commission of offence punishable u/s 354 IPC. Accused touched Meenakshi on her private body parts on the premise of curing her stomach medical problem. He made Meenakshi massage his penis impressing upon her, the link between his ejaculation with her stom- ach ache, also threatening her that her brother would die instead if she did not comply. The rustic uneducated lady complied his diktats but revealed to her relative after three days landing with a complaint in police. Accused very well knew what he was doing. He lured the woman by deliberately laying and weaving a trap. He took advan- tage of this naive woman who in the name of faith and belief acted as per the instructions, of accused, who was assured that lady would not and could not react as he was able to establish a fiduciary nature of relationship with Meenakshi.
47.Section 354 IPC punishes the usage of criminal force or an assault with an intention to outrage the modesty of a woman. Here is a case FIR No.207/04 PS Delhi Cantt. 22/31 State Vs. Madan Lal where woman was made a pawn and her sense of womanhood crushed and later flaunted. The act of accused Madan Lal is a mirror of his intention. The ingredients of offence punishable u/s 354 IPC also accordingly stand proved and satisfied.
48.The legal ingredients of criminal intimidation of offence punishable u/s 506 IPC are enunciated herein : -
Criminal intimidation as defined in Section 503 IPC is a threat, that is to say, a declaration of an intention to inflict injury to the person, reputation or property of an individual which must be necessarily communicated to other person. the most impor-
tant ingredient of this offence is that there should be inten-
tions to cause alarm or to cause
the person threatened to do any
act which he is not legally
FIR No.207/04 PS Delhi Cantt. 23/31
State Vs. Madan Lal
bound to do.
49.Accused had threatened the complainant Meenakshi not to reveal about the details of the incident to anyone, else her brother would die forcing her to commit the act which she therefore, would not have done had he not threatened her and also had caused alarm to her be-
cause of which she just complied what he stated, restraining to divulge details of what she suffered to anyone for 3 days being frightened of the act and the threatening given by the accused person who made her intentionally believe what he stated. The ingredients requisite for commission of offence punishable u/s 506 (I) IPC, in view of the ob- servations made above also stand fulfilled.
50.Accused can be said to be presumably aware of the genius and temperament of victim having familiarity with her thoughts and he attuned his threats accordingly. The threat of causing of death of her brother was sufficient to cause alarm and to unnerve the com- plainant. She was frightened. She was under that threat perception communicated directly to her was made to commit an illegal and im- moral act. The ingredients necessary to constitute offence punishable u/s 506 IPC are accordingly satisfactorily made out against accused.
51.This Court is pained to have dealt with such a case mirroring so- ciety with such prevalent superstitions which let such like accused person thrive with their ill conceived designs. Meenakshi in this case is just one example who atleast and atlast finally stood up FIR No.207/04 PS Delhi Cantt. 24/31 State Vs. Madan Lal against what she faced not only for her own good but for many women like her who also would have, in differing proportions ex- perienced similarly.
52.This court holds accused Madan Lal guilty of having intentionally outraging the modesty of Meenakshi and threatening her and is ac- cordingly convicted for the offence punishable u/s 354 IPC and Sec- tion 506 (I) IPC. Accused Madan Lal, however, is acquitted of the of- fence punishable u/s 420 IPC for lack of sufficient evidence in this re- spect on record.
Ordered accordingly.
Announced in the open court today (SHELLY ARORA) i.e 26th of May, 2012. Metropolitan Magistrate (Mahila Court)/West/THC 26.05.2012 FIR No.207/04 PS Delhi Cantt. 25/31