Delhi District Court
State vs . 1. Dr. Monish Rout on 23 February, 2015
IN THE COURT OF SH. VIRENDER BHAT, A.S.J. (SPECIAL
FAST TRACK COURT), DWARKA COURTS, NEW DELHI.
SC No. 42/14
Unique Case ID No. 02405R0093402014
State Vs. 1. Dr. Monish Rout
S/o Sh. Sheshrao Rout,
R/o C-65, DGS Society,
Plot No. 6, Dwarka,
Sector-22, New Delhi.
2. Dr. Pooja Nautiyal
W/o Dr. Monish Rout,
R/o C-65, DGS Society,
Plot No. 6, Dwarka,
Sector-22, New Delhi.
3. Shanti Prasad Nautiyal
S/o Late Sh. Udai Ram Nautiyal,
R/o C-43, DGS Society,
Plot No. 6, Dwarka,
Sector-22, New Delhi.
4. Vijay Nautiyal
S/o Sh. Shanti Prasad Nautiyal,
R/o C-43, DGS Society,
Plot No. 6, Dwarka,
Sector-22, New Delhi.
5. Sangeeta Nautiyal
W/o Sh. Shanti Prasad Nautiyal,
R/o C-43, DGS Society,
Plot No. 6, Dwarka,
Sector-22, New Delhi.
SC No.42/14 Page 1 of 19
Date of Institution : 15.04.2014
FIR No. 120/14 dated 09.03.2014
U/s. 354/354A/354C/354D/506/509/34/376/109 IPC
P.S. Dwarka Sector-23
Date of reserving judgment/Order : 12.02.2015
Date of pronouncement : 23.02.2015
JUDGMENT
1. The above named 5 accused were charge sheeted by the prosecution for the offences u/s. 354/354A/506/376/109/354A
(i) (ii)/34 IPC.
2. The accused Vijay is the husband of the complainant. Accused Shanti Prasad and accused Sangeeta are her parents-in- law. Accused Pooja is complainant's sister-in-law (nanad) and accused Monish Rout is Pooja's husband.
3. The prosecution case is that the prosecutrix got married to accused Vijay Nautiyal on 30.11.11 and after some time she found that her husband is not inclined to come near her and that her brother-in-law (Nandoi) i.e. accused Monish herein was having a bad eye upon her. The accused Monish used to flirt her, hold her hands, touch her cheeks and shower praises regarding her bodily features. In December, 2011, when the family of the prosecutrix had gone to attend the marriage function in Gurgaon, accused Monish touched her hips while dancing and when she complained to her husband about the acts of Monish, her husband Vijay advised her to ignore the same. The accused Monish SC No.42/14 Page 2 of 19 alongwith his wife started residing in the house of the prosecutrix from May, 13 onwards as his wife Pooja was in a family way. The husband of the prosecutrix is a drunkard as well as chain smoker and the accused Monish kept him under the influence of liquor. The husband of the prosecutrix was not having any physical relations with her and he also used to beat her and torture her with a view to conceal his weakness. Meanwhile, accused Monish used to tease her openly and this fact was known to her in-laws. On 15.08.13, when the prosecutrix was present in the kitchen, accused Monish reached there and kissed her forcibly on her lips and pressed her breasts. He also told her that his wife Pooja is of no use and he cannot control himself. Prosecutrix escaped from the kitchen and went to her bed room and tried to wake up her husband. Monish also reached there and started rubbing his stethoscope on her hips and all over her body from behind as well as from the front side. The accused Monish repeatedly asked her to engage in physical relations with him. Whenever she used to go to have a shower in the bathroom or used to visit washroom, he used to make obscene sounds and force himself into the bathroom as well as washroom. On 17.08.13, she mustered courage and narrated all the incidents to her father-in-law, mother-in-law, husband Vijay and sister-in-law Pooja. She told them that she is not feeling safe in the house as the accused Monish had attempted to commit rape upon her. Her father-in-law threatened her that these talks should not go out of the house or otherwise she will have to face dire consequences. Her Mother-in-law told her that they want a grand son or a grand daughter and if their son Vijay is not capable of fathering a child, let Monish do so and nobody would come to know about the same. During the same night at SC No.42/14 Page 3 of 19 about 1.00 a.m., when she had visited washroom, Monish reached there. He was wearing only underwear. He gagged her mouth and forcibly palped his hand all over her body. He told her that he loves her and cannot see her crying and asked her to leave her drunkard husband Vijay. Ultimately, the prosecutrix was thrown out of the matrimonial house on 12.10.13 and on her complaint, case was registered u/s. 323/354/506/509/34/120B IPC.
4. It is further case of prosecution that the IO S.I. P.R. Huda visited the spot of incident i.e. the matrimonial house of the prosecutrix and prepared a rough site plan at her instance. Accused Monish was arrested on the same day at the instance of the prosecutrix. Statement of prosecutrix u/s. 164 Cr.P.C. was got recorded on 10.03.14 on the basis of which Section 376/109 IPC was added to the case. Accused Pooja, Shanti Prasad Nautiyal, Sangeeta Nautiyal and Vijay Nautiyal had obtained anticipatory bail from the Sessions Court and hence were formally arrested in this case.
5. After the completion of investigation IO prepared the charge sheet and submitted the same before the concerned Ld. M.M.
6. Upon committal of case to the Court of Sessions, Charge u/s. 376 IPC was framed against accused Monish on 11.08.14. On the same day Charge u/s. 354/109 IPC and u/s. 376/109 IPC was framed against accused Pooja, Shanti Prasad Nautiyal, Vijay and Sangeeta. Further Charge u/s. 506 IPC was framed against accused Shanti Prasad Nautiyal on the same day.
SC No.42/14 Page 4 of 19All the accused denied the charges and hence trial was held.
7. The prosecutrix has been examined as PW-2. The relevant portion of her examination in chief is reproduced herein:-
"I got married to accused Vijay on 30.11.2011. It was an arranged marriage. After some days of marriage, I felt that behaviour of Vijay towards me was very strange. He used to keep distance from me and was reluctant to come near me. However, accused Monish was having a bad eye upon me. No physical relations between myself and accused Vijay took place during first month after the marriage. I apprised my mother in law accused Sangeeta about the same and she told me that Vijay is a shy person and everything would be alright in near future. However, thereafter physical relations started between myself and Vijay.
Whenever accused Monish alongwith his wife accused Pooja used to come to our house on weekends or on weekdays, he used to flirt me, touch my hands inappropriately, pull my cheeks and used to shower praises for my eyes. He used to convey his personal information to me without my asking. I doubted his intentions towards me right since the beginning but the same got confirmed when he touched my hips inappropriately while dancing in Kingdom of Dreams, Gurgaon, in the month of December, 2011 where we all had gone on that day. I complained to my husband Vijay about the acts of Monish but he ignored my complaints and told me that Monish is a colourful person and I should avoid him.
On account of pregnancy of Pooja, she alongwith her husband Monish came to my matrimonial house in the month of May, 2013 and started residing alongwith us. In the month of August, 2013, Monish and Pooja took a flat on rent on the 6th floor on the same building in which we were residing. However, they only kept their goods in that flat but continued to reside with us in our 4th floor flat. On account of excessive drinking and smoking, the health of my husband Vijay started deteriorating and he was having SC No.42/14 Page 5 of 19 pain in his liver. Monish started taking advantage of such condition of Vijay. He used to administer liquor to Vijay to make him drunk.
Monish is a doctor by profession and is doing job in Sir Ganga Ram Hospital. He has good contacts in the hospital. Monish used to mark attendance in Sir Ganga Ram Hospital and then used to return to our flat in just 2 or 3 hours as he was having freedom in that regard. He had got a job with a better pay package in B.L. Kapoor Hospital but he remained there for a few months only and returned to Sir Ganga Ram Hospital to enjoy the aforementioned freedom.
On the night intervening between 15.8.2013 and 16.8.2013, when I alongwith Vijay was sleeping in our bedroom, my mother in law Sangeeta knocked on the door. When I opened the door, she asked me to boil some milk for her and then returned to her room. When I was boiling milk in the kitchen, accused Monish came from behind, caught hold of me, planted a kiss forcibly on my lips and pressed my breast. He told me that his wife Pooja is of no use and he now feels it difficult to control himself. I somehow saved myself and ran towards my bedroom. My husband was sleeping in the room and he had consumed liquor on that day also. I tried to wake him up and to complain to him about the acts of Monish but he did not listen to me and pushed me away. I went to the door to close it from inside but soon Monish reached there alongwith his stethoscope. He pushed the door and came inside the room. He placed the knob of the stethoscope on my breasts saying that my heart beat has increased. After placing the knob on my breasts, he rubbed it on my body downward towards my private part. He rubbed it against my private part as well as on my hips. I was wearing a knighty at that time. Thereafter he lifted up my knighty and inserted the knob of the stethoscope into my vagina. I felt intense pain and started crying as well as weeping. Then Monish left the room.
Next morning when I told my husband Vijay about the misdeeds of Monish, he did not show any reaction and did not do anything at all. On the next day i.e. 17.8.2013, I decided to tell all this to my SC No.42/14 Page 6 of 19 father in law. Accordingly I narrated the incident to my father in law, mother in law and sister in law in the presence of my husband Vijay. I told them that I am not safe in this house as Monish has attempted to rape me. I further told them that to do something about Monish or otherwise, I would go to stay with my parents. I thought that my father in law Shanti Prasad would understand my plight and would do something in my favour. However, on the contrary, he started threatening me that he is a retired service person from RAW and has very high contacts and if these incidents would come to the knowledge of any person outside the house, it would not be good for me. My mother in law told me that I want a child and they want a grandchild and if Vijay is not able to father a child, let Monish do it with me and by this nobody else would come to know about the same. My father in law also threatened me that if I tried to disclose these incidents to anybody, he would make me disappeared. I felt scared and did not know what to do. After some time, I left my matrimonial house and reached Metro Station Sector-21, Dwarka. I had decided to tell everything to my parents. But soon my husband Vijay reached there in his car. He did not permit me to enter the Metro Station. He told me that if I want to stay in their house, I would have to do all this. Vijay as well as his family knew that my father is a heart patient and has undergone heart by-pass surgery. They always used to take advantage of my father health condition. That day also Vijay told me to go and tell everything to my father saying that it will further affect the health of my father. He further told me that if something happened to my father, I would be responsible for the same. Accordingly, I returned to my matrimonial home alongwith Vijay.
During the same night, I felt urge to go to washroom. There was no attached bathroom in our bedroom. Accordingly when I came out of the bedroom and entered the bathroom which was at a distance from our room, accused Monish also reached there and came inside the bathroom. He touched my breasts and other front body parts. He started telling me that "Jay, I love you baby. I cannot see you SC No.42/14 Page 7 of 19 crying." He further told me that he wants a mutual and consensual relation with me and that too lifelong. He told me that he can do it forcibly also but he does not want to do it in that manner. He also told me that everybody in the family is in favour of our relation. Thereafter he left the bathroom.
There was festival of Rakhi after two days. I had gone to my parental house on the occasion of Rakhi festival. I wanted to narrate all the incidents to my parents but did not mustered courage to do so. I could only tell my parents that Vijay has started consuming excessive liquor and he has started abusing and beating me. I also told my mother only that Monish has a bad eye upon me. I requested my parents to allow me to stay with them for a fortnight. However, just within a week i.e. 31.8.2013, Vijay came to my parental house and sought apology from myself as well as my parents. He assured my parents to keep me properly. Accordingly I accompanied Vijay on the same day to my matrimonial home.
In the month of September, 2013, I found that Monish was behaving in a controlled manner. However, he used to enter our room and also used to peep inside our room. Whenever I used to come out of bathroom after taking a bath, he used to catch hold of me from behind. I used to complain about his actions to my mother in law Sangeeta and my sister in law Pooja but they always ignored my complaints. My mother in law told me that when Pooja has no objection to relation of Monish with me, why do I have any objection. It was confirmed to me that they know the behaviour of Monish towards me and they have been taking advantage of excessive drinking habits of Vijay.
On 09.10.2013 when I returned from my office, my mother in law told me in the presence of Vijay that she is going to Dehradun and Monish is totally ready. She further told me that I am throwing tantrums and everything should have taken place till her return from Dehradun and she wants result. Next day I wanted to tell everything to my parents. However, it was 10.10.2013, the 30th marriage anniversary of my parents. I had called my mother to wish them on their SC No.42/14 Page 8 of 19 marriage anniversary and before I could say anything, she told me that they are not celebrating the occasion on account of ill health of my father. Hence I could not tell them anything, even though I wanted to.
On 11.10.2013, my mother in law Sangeeta came to my room late at night and told me that she is leaving for Dehradun the next morning and nobody would be in the house except myself and Monish. She told me that I may or may not agree to it but Monish would not leave me. I did not know what to do. I did not want to stay in that house. I came out of the house that very moment. I made a call to my mother telling her that I am safe here and requested her to take me from here. Since it was late at night, my mother told me that they would come in the morning as my father is not feeling well.
My parents came to my matrimonial home in the morning of 12.10.2013. However, my in-laws started complaining to them regarding my behaviour. In order to conceal his own attitude and conduct towards me, my husband Vijay told my parents to take me back. Accordingly I took some clothes of mine and came alongwith my parents to my parental house. Since thereafter I have been staying with my parents. Nobody from my in-laws came to take me back.
On 14.10.2013, I alongwith my parents, my brother, my uncle and my maternal uncle had gone to my matrimonial house to have talks with the accused. That day also Vijay and his father Shanti Prasad misbehaved with us and asked us to leave the house. Accordingly we came back."
8. She further deposed that feeling no other option, she alongwith her mother visited CAW Cell, Pitampura and submitted a written complaint there. However, the officials of CAW Cell told her to go to police station and lodge a complaint against Monish there. She narrated her ordeal to her father on 05.03.14 and then alongwith her mother, brother and lawyer's wife Vaishali visited the police station on 09.03.14 where she submitted a written SC No.42/14 Page 9 of 19 complaint Ex. PW2/A. She was taken to DDU Hospital for medical examination. She proved her statement u/s. 164 Cr.P.C. as Ex. PW2/B.
9. In the cross examination she deposed that she has filed a complaint in CAW Cell and a complaint under Domestic Violence Act against the accused. Ex. PW2/D1 is the complaint filed by her against the accused u/s. 12 of Domestic Violence Act and Ex. PW2/D2 is the complaint filed by her against the accused in CAW Cell on 18.12.13. She stated that she alongwith her husband Vijay are seen in photographs Ex. PW2/D3, Ex. PW2/D4, Ex. PW2/D5 and Ex. PW2/D6. She also stated that these photographs have been taken on the dates mentioned thereupon. According to her, physical relations between her and Vijay started after about one month of the marriage. She stated that she alongwith her husband had left for honeymoon trip to Malaysia and Singapore on 25.01.12 and the destination was selected by her husband Vijay. She admitted that Ex. PW2/D7 and Ex. PW2/D8 are the print outs of their tour itinerary and the writings on the same are in her handwriting. She stated that during that period they had physical relations with each other only once. According to her, the photographs Ex. PW2/D9 to Ex. PW2/D21 were taken during the said honeymoon tour. She admitted that she has been using mobile no. 8586966813 since marriage. She also admitted the text messages Ex. PW2/D22 were sent by her to accused Monish on his mobile no. 9582731093.
10. She did not recollect the day or date when they had gone to Kingdom of Dreams, Gurgaon and stated that it was either SC No.42/14 Page 10 of 19 in the month of December, 2011 or in the month of January, 2012. She denied that accused Monish and Pooja had not accompanied them to that place. She stated that she had written the complaint Ex. PW2/A in the police station and her friend Vaishali was with her at that time. Her parents were present outside that room in the police station. She stated that Vaishali's husband Sh. P.K. Saini is a lawyer. She had shown to Vaishali the complaint which she had submitted in CAW Cell and consulted her regarding the procedure to file a complaint in the police station. She stated that accused Pooja and Monish had started residing in her matrimonial house since May, 2013 and had taken the flat on rent on the 6th Floor of the same building in August, 2013. According to her there are three bed rooms in the flat owned by her in-laws and all the rooms have inbuilt locks fixed in the door. She admitted that there is a knob fixed upon the lock on the inner side of the door by which it can be locked by a person from inside the room. She admitted that Ex. PW2/D24 and Ex. PW2/D25 is the book prepared in Bensups Hospital on 17.11.12 when she had visited the hospital for pregnancy test which was negative. She stated that the doctor had advised her pregnancy test as she had missed her regular menstrual period and had put on weight.
11. She further deposed that on the intervening night of 15.08.13 and 16.08.13, accused Sangeeta had knocked the door of her bedroom at about 11.00 p.m. from 12 midnight. All her in-laws were present in the house during that night. She stated that accused Sangeeta was not present in the kitchen when she was boiling milk. She had put one cup of milk inside the microwave oven for boiling and as soon as she put the milk in the oven, SC No.42/14 Page 11 of 19 Monish came inside the kitchen. Accused Sangeeta was present in her room at that time but she cannot say whether she (Sangeeta) was awake or not. She cannot tell the time for which Monish remained in the kitchen with her. Sangeeta did not come to the kitchen during that time. She did not recall the time when she and Vijay had taken dinner on that day. She also did not recall whether Vijay had taken dinner on that day or not on account of consuming excessive liquor. She stated that she had taken dinner in her bedroom and after taking dinner she had wound up the kitchen and then went to sleep. She could not tell after how much time of taking dinner did she sleep. She had not suffered bleeding from her private part when Monish had inserted the knob of stethoscope in it. She didn't know whether Monish had taken stethoscope alongwith him thereafter. Monish had remained in their bedroom at that time for about 5 to 10 minutes.
12. In the cross examination conducted on 28.01.15 she candedly admitted that the contents of her complaint Ex. PW2/A are not true and correct. She stated that she had gone to the police station with her matrimonial dispute with her husband and there she was told by police officials to write whatever they say. As she was under intense depression and stress, she wrote whatever she was told to write by the police officials and same happened when she was produced before the Ld. M.M. for narrating of her statement. The police officials had accompanied her to the Court on that date and told her to say to the Ld. M.M. whatever is written in the complaint. She stated that she deposed before this Court also on the pressure of police officials. The police officials had met her out of the Court and told her to state in the SC No.42/14 Page 12 of 19 Court whatever is written in the complaint. She could not tell their names and ranks as they were in private dress and without having any name plate. She admitted that she was never subjected to sexual assault by accused Monish and the incidents mentioned by her in the complaints Ex. PW2/A, statement u/s. 164 Cr.P.C., Ex. PW2/B and in the examination in chief have never taken place. She stated that she has mentioned these incidents only on the advise and pressure of police officials. She admitted that the contents of her complaint, statement u/s. 161 Cr.P.C. and examination in chief are incorrect and false. She stated that there were temperamental differences between herself and her husband Vijay and she wanted to file a complaint regarding that only against her husband. She had never told police officials that she had been sexually assaulted by accused Monish. She stated that she was not aware about the ramifications of the allegations contained in her complaint, statement u/s. 164 Cr.P.C. and in the examination in chief against the accused. It is when she realised that these allegations are very serious and would entail serious ripercations for the accused that she made up her mind to tell the truth before the Court and accordingly she stated the truth. She stated that she has deposed thruthfully and without any fear threat or coercion on that day and whatever she had stated earlier before this Court was not true and correct.
13. In the re-examination conducted by Ld. APP after seeking permission of this Court, the prosecutrix denied that she had taken a written complaint from her home to the police station and its contents are true and correct. She denied that she had mentioned the incidents of sexual assault truthfully and correctly SC No.42/14 Page 13 of 19 in her complaint Ex. PW2/A, statement u/s. 164 Cr.P.C., Ex. PW2/B and in her examination in chief. She denied that she has now deposed falsely in favour of the accused under their fear and pressure.
14. Even if only the examination in chief of the prosecutrix is considered, the version given by her seems to be highly improbable and unbelievable. It beats all imagination to think that accused Monish (the son-in-law of the family) would tease, molest and attempt to rape his sister-in-law i.e. the prosecutrix in his own matrimonial home where his conduct would be watched by his parents-in-law, his brother-in-law and even his own wife accused Pooja. All the accused herein are well read and belonging to a respectable family. Accused Monish is himself a doctor by profession. His wife Pooja is also a doctor. Both accused Shanti Prasad and accused Sangeeta are retired government servants. Therefore, it is highly improbable that accused Monish would resort to such humiliating acts and the other accused including his own wife would aid, assist and encourage him in doing so.
15. The prosecutrix has deposed that there had been no sexual relations between her and her husband right since the day of marriage and even during the honeymoon trip in Malaysia in January, 2012 and the accused Monish was taking undue advantage of the same. However, the photographs Ex. PW2/D3 to Ex. PW2/D6, which were taken soon after their marriage do not indicate that there was any acrimony between prosecutrix and her husband or that they were not having intimate relations. The photographs do show that accused Vijay was very much interested SC No.42/14 Page 14 of 19 in having intimate physical relations with the prosecutrix like that between a husband and wife. Similarly, the photographs Ex. PW2/D9 to Ex. PW2/D21, which were taken during the honeymoon trip to Malaysia and Singapore in January, 2012 nowhere indicate that the prosecutrix was not happy with the accused on account of lack of physical relations between the too. To the contrary, the photographs indicate that the prosecutrix was very cheerful during the trip and had been spending a good quality time with her husband, as is done by a newly married couple during honeymoon trip.
16. The prosecutrix has admitted that the text messages Ex. PW2/D22 (colly.) were sent by her to accused Monish on his Mobile No. 9582731093. These messages have been sent in the years 2012 and 2013. Perusal of these text messages demonstrates that the prosecutrix had been congratulating accused Monish on the Doctor's day, on purchasing a new car, on the festival of Lorhi, wishing him on his birthday, thanking him for the treat and also exchanging jokes with him. The sending of the messages of the aforesaid nature by prosecutrix to accused Monish do not give any indication that she was being regularly teased and molested by him, as deposed by her.
17. The incident dated 15.08.13 also does not seem to be believable. In this regard the prosecutrix has deposed in examination in chief that on the night intervening between 15.08.13 and 16.08.13, when she was sleeping in her bedroom alongwith her husband, her mother-in-law i.e. accused Sangeeta knocked on the door and asked her to boil some milk for her.
SC No.42/14 Page 15 of 19When she was boiling milk in the kitchen, accused Monish came from behind, caught hold of her, planted a kiss forcibly on her lips and pressed her breasts. She somehow saved herself and ran towards her bedroom where her husband was sleeping in drunken state. She tried to wake him up but could not and meanwhile Monish also reached there with a stethoscope. He placed the knob of the stethoscope on her breasts, rubbed it on her body towards her private part, lifted up her nighty and inserted the knob of stethoscope into her vagina. She felt intense pain and started crying as well as weeping and then Monish left the room.
18. It may be noted here that the prosecutrix has not mentioned about insertion of stethoscope knob into her vagina by accused Monish in complaint Ex. PW2/A which is the basis of the FIR. She has stated so for the first time in her statement u/s. 164 Cr.P.C. Ex. PW2/B. No explanation has come on record from prosecutrix as to why did not she mentioned about the same in her complaint Ex. PW2/A. Thus she has made clear improvement upon her initial complaint which makes the incident doubtful. Even otherwise also it appears that the incident has been only a figment of her imagination and far from being true. In her cross examination she has deposed that accused Sangeeta had knocked on the door of her bedroom at about 11.00 p.m. or 12.00 midnight to tell her to boil some milk for her. Nothing has come on record to suggest why would accused Sangeeta asked her to boil milk for her at such odd hour of the night. It is not the case of prosecution that accused Snageeta used to take boiled milk everyday at about 11.00 p.m. or 12.00 midnight or that she was sick on 15.08.13 as a result of which she wanted to take milk during the night. She has SC No.42/14 Page 16 of 19 admitted in her cross examination that the doors of all the rooms in her matrimonial house including the door of her bedroom are having an inbuilt lock and the door can be locked by a person from inside the room. Hence it is not understandable why did not she lock the door of her bedroom from inside when she rushed to her bedroom from kitchen on facing molestation from accused Monish. She has deposed that she had cried and wept after the incident but it is very strange that none of her in-laws came to her room and see what had happened. Presumably, accused Sangeeta would have been awake as she was waiting for the milk to come. It is also not clear from the evidence of prosecutrix as to whether she had given milk to her mother-in-law later on and if not, whether her mother-in-law i.e. accused Sangeeta had come to her room to enquire why milk was not given to her. It is also not believable that accused Monish would have temerity to do such an act in his own in-laws house knowing fully well that his mother-in- law i.e. accused Sangeeta is still awake and he may be caught red handed.
19. It seems that after facing extensive cross examination from the Ld. Counsel for the accused, when the prosecutrix realised her failure to substantiate the false allegations levelled by her against the accused, she came up with truth on 28.01.15 when she candidly admitted that the contents of her complaint Ex. PW2/A, statement to the Ld. M.M. u/s. 164 Cr.P.C. Ex. PW2/B and the examination in chief are not true and correct. She stated that she had gone to the police station only with a matrimonial dispute with her husband and there she wrote the complaint as advised by the police officials. She stated that there were temperamental SC No.42/14 Page 17 of 19 differences between her and her husband Vijay and she wanted to file a complaint regarding that only against her husband and had never told police officials that she has been sexually assaulted by accused Monish. She stated that she was not aware about the ramifications of the allegations contained in her complaint and when she realised that the allegations are very serious and would entail serious repercussions for the accused, she made up her mind to tell the truth before the Court.
20. Thus it is evident from the deposition of the prosecutrix herself in the cross examination dated 28.01.15 that she had lodged a false complaint against the accused, had given a false statement to the Ld. M.M. and also deposed falsely before this Court during her examination in chief.
21. Hence all the accused are liable to be acquitted.
22. It is ironical and immensely regrettable that the five accused persons including two doctors and two senior citizens had to face humiliating allegations of rape/abatement to rape which ultimately turned out to be false and baseless. It appears that the prosecutrix had compatibility issues with her husband i.e. accused Vijay and wanted to get rid of him and in order to create a ground for divorce, she lodged a false complaint making false allegations against him, his sister, brother-in-law and parents. The prosecutrix did not even spare her old aged parents-in-law who have been leading a retired life after finishing their unblemished service career and now have to live with a scar of having been accused in a rape case.
SC No.42/14 Page 18 of 1923. It is a fit case where the prosecutrix deserves to be prosecuted for setting police machinery in motion on false information and for giving false evidence before this Court but as I am informed that her husband i.e. accused Vijay has agreed to give consent for mutual divorce, which may not take place if the prosecution of the prosecutrix for the aforesaid offences is ordered. Since the prosecutrix and her husband have agreed to forget the bitterness which had arisen on account of present rape case and have agreed to dissolve their marriage by way of mutual divorce, I feel it not in the interest of justice to aggravate the bitterness any further by directing that the prosecutrix be prosecuted for giving false evidence before this Court.
24. Resultantly, all the five accused persons are hereby acquitted.
Announced in open (VIRENDER BHAT)
Court on 23.02.2015 Addl. Sessions Judge
(Special Fast Track Court)
Dwarka Courts, New Delhi.
SC No.42/14 Page 19 of 19