Delhi District Court
State vs Deepak Fir No. 77/13//Sc ... on 19 November, 2013
1
IN THE COURT OF SHRI SANJEEV KUMAR: ADDITIONAL
SESSIONS JUDGE01: NORTH: ROHINI:DELHI
S. C. NO:103/13.
FIR NO.77/13.
PS : S.P. BADLI.
U/S:342/354 IPC AND 8 OF POCSO ACT.
STATE
VERSUS
DEEPAK S/O. SHRI HARI SHANKAR
R/O. MAHENDER KA MAKKAN, GALI BEHIND
MASJID, VILLAGE - BADLI, DELHI.
Date of Institution:05.04.2013
Date of Argument:19.11.2013
Date of Decision:19.11.2013
JUDGMENT
1. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that, On 10.02.2013 a PCR Call vide DD No.31A was received regarding eveteasing to a girl by a boy at behind Laxmi Dharam Kanta, Village Badli and the said boy was apprehended and on the direction of SHO the said DD was assigned to HC Ved Prakash. HC Ved Prakash alongwith Ct. H. Raju reached at the spot i.e. B55, Badli Extension and where complainant Mohd. Aslam met with them and who recorded his statement that, "he alongwith his family were residing at the abovesaid address and doing the job of maison and at his house he alongwith his wife, two sons and one daughter R (real name withheld) have been residing. On STATE VS DEEPAK FIR NO. 77/13//SC NO.103/13//PS-S.P. BADLI// U/S.- 342/354 IPC & 8 OF POCSO ACT PAGE 1 OF 8 2 that day in the evening hours he alongwith his wife had gone to the house of Milesha Khatoon for some work and when they returned back at their house at 6pm, he found his daughter R was weeping at that time and one boy was apprehended by the public persons and later on his name revealed as Deepak. Thereafter he asked his daughter reason about her weeping then she had told to him that, the said boy had misbehaving with her by touching her breasts".
Thereafter IO had prepared rukka and handed over to Ct. H. Raju for registration of FIR. IO had inspected the spot and prepared the scaled site plan and prosecutrix R was sent to the hospital for her internal medical examination alongwith lady constable to BSA Hospital. Thereafter accused was arrested. Further investigation was handed over to WSI Neetu and finally completion of the investigations, chargesheet for offence u/s. 342/354 IPC & 8 of POCSO Act filed before the court through SHO.
2. After compliance of the provisions of Section 207 Code of Criminal Procedure, Ld. MM committed the case to the Court of Sessions. Thereafter, it was assigned to this court.
3. Vide order dated 22.05.2013, charges for offence u/s.
10 of POCSO Act is framed against accused, to which accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
STATE VS DEEPAK FIR NO. 77/13//SC NO.103/13//PS-S.P. BADLI// U/S.- 342/354 IPC & 8 OF POCSO ACT PAGE 2 OF 8 3
4. Prosecution in support of its case examined FIVE witnesses i.e. PW1 Ct. H. Raju, PW2 Mohd. Aslam, PW3 R, PW4 WHC Komal and PW5 Dr. Roopal Ilwadi.
5. Out of those witnesses PW2 Mohd. Aslam, PW3/prosecutrix R are the most important witnesses.
6. PW2 Mohd. Aslam had stated in his examination that, he was working as Labour and residing in the above said premises as tenant along with his wife and three children i.e one daughter R and two sons and age of R is eight years old and she was not studying at the time of incident. After the incident R has taken admission in primary school in village Badli. His daughter also studied at Madrasa in his native village before coming to Delhi. About 45 months before from today, date and month he does not remember, he had gone to his work place and left the house at 8 am and returned to my home at 6 pm. His daughter had informed that accused person who is residing in his neighbourhood had entered in his house and after closing the door, accused had touched the breast and other body parts of his daughter and when she raised alarm, public persons gathered and caught hold the accused. At the time of incident his daughter was alone in house as her mother had gone to her work place i.e factory and his both sons of tender age were playing outside the house. He has reported the matter to the police by dialing STATE VS DEEPAK FIR NO. 77/13//SC NO.103/13//PS-S.P. BADLI// U/S.- 342/354 IPC & 8 OF POCSO ACT PAGE 3 OF 8 4 number 100 and police arrived at the spot. His statement was recorded ExPW2/A. After interrogation, police taken the accused to the police station and arrested vide memo ExPW2/B. His personal search was also conducted, same is ExPW2/C. Police thereafter taken his daughter to the hospital for her medical examination but he and his wife refused for her internal medical examination as no rape had been committed. Statement of his daughter was also recorded.
In his cross examination he stated that he was sitting at Tikona Park, Badli Chowk on the day of incident and he remained present there up to 8 pm. On that day, he did not get any work. Deepak came to meet his friend who is residing on the upper floor of my residence and his friend was also present there on that day and at the time of alleged incident. Accused usually come to the building where he and his friend resides. His two sons were also present at his residence at the time of alleged incident. His children used to visit the room of friend of Deepak and in presence of Deepak also. He could not say both the friends of accused and accused keeps his kids in fair manner like elderly people. His wife was also not present at the time of alleged incident. The police met him at 6 pm when he was called by his son from the Tikona Chowk and he came at his house. He admitted that his son has told him that at Tikona chowk that a STATE VS DEEPAK FIR NO. 77/13//SC NO.103/13//PS-S.P. BADLI// U/S.- 342/354 IPC & 8 OF POCSO ACT PAGE 4 OF 8 5 dispute has been arisen between accused and his daughter. He has handed over the birth certificate of his daughter which he had got prepared after the alleged incident. He knew that accused Deepak and his friend have never met any altercation with any of the resident of the locality. He also admitted that some times accused used to behave his children in a kind manner and some time he used to scold them. He denied the suggestion that, he has stated to the police that the accused has closed the door of his house and touched the breast and other parts of body of his daughter not at the instance of his daughter or that he had stated said facts at the instance of my neighbours. He had not heard the cries (chikh) of his daughter. His statement was recorded only after making the call to police on 100 number. No quarrel has taken place with accused prior to arrival of police. Police has brought the accused from his house. Police remained at his house for about 510 minutes. Deepak has suffered injuries from the beatings given by himself and public persons. His daughter has stated to him that, accused had touched her breast and other body parts.
He further denied the suggestion that, his daughter's body parts were not touched by the accused or that due to said reason he had not got conducted the medical examination of his daughter. He had volunteered that, she was STATE VS DEEPAK FIR NO. 77/13//SC NO.103/13//PS-S.P. BADLI// U/S.- 342/354 IPC & 8 OF POCSO ACT PAGE 5 OF 8 6 medically examined. He further denied the suggestion that he was at Tikona Chowk till 8 pm on the day of incident. Police had not got any signature on any document from him at his house on the day of incident. After the day of incident, he did not go to PS. He further denied the suggestion that false allegation has been leveled against accused to pressurize his friend Ajay to vacate the tenanted premises residing upon upper floor. He admitted that the landlord of Ajay and he are same and he has been read over his statement today by the police official. He denied the suggestion that he is giving statement at the instance of police or that no such incident has happened with his daughter or that he is deposing falsely.
7. PW3/Prosecutrix R stated that, Accused Deepak used to come to her house as accused was friend of his father. Accused had given her two rupees and thereafter went away. Accused has not done any wrong act with her. She was alone at that time. She had told to her father that one person had come to their house but her father said nothing to worry. Her father had called the police. She does not know why her father had called the police. Police aunty had not inquired from her anything. She was taken to hospital for medical examination by police aunty. She does not know why she was taken for medical examination by police aunty. Thereafter, she was declared hostile by ld. Addl. STATE VS DEEPAK FIR NO. 77/13//SC NO.103/13//PS-S.P. BADLI// U/S.- 342/354 IPC & 8 OF POCSO ACT PAGE 6 OF 8 7 PP and she was cross examined by ld. Addl. PP for the State and in her cross examination she had denied the suggestion that police had inquired from her and recorded her statement. Further she admitted that, one person i.e accused witness correctly identified him by pointing towards him, had come to her house and accused had inquired from her about one Ajay and she had told to him that Ajay will might be at his house and she further admitted that thereafter accused had closed the gate of her house. She denied the suggestion that thereafter accused had touched her breast. Accused had only touched my hand. She had asked accused not to touch her hand. She shouted thereafter accused went away. She shouted as she was afraid. When she shouted her mausa Gulzar came. Accused Deepak had already gone. She denied the suggestion that due to tutoring of her father she has not stated that accused has touched her breast or that she stated the wrong facts that accused has not touched her breast as her father has compromised with the accused or that she is deposing falsely.
In her cross examination by ld. Counsel for accused, she has admitted that accused Deepak used to scold her as she used to play more and study less. She further admitted that, whenever her brothers used to play outside, she also wants to play with them. She denied the suggestion that accused Deepak STATE VS DEEPAK FIR NO. 77/13//SC NO.103/13//PS-S.P. BADLI// U/S.- 342/354 IPC & 8 OF POCSO ACT PAGE 7 OF 8 8 has stated to her after holding her hand that she has not to go outside to play with her brothers. On the upper floor of her room Ajay is residing and she used to go there. She further denied the suggestion that Ajay had also asked her to study and not to play much. Further she admitted that after the above incident, her father has admitted her in school.
8. Hence, considering the statement of abovesaid PWs, I held that prosecution has miserably failed to prove that accused sexually assaulted prosecutrix R by touching her private part from outside her underwear. Hence, accused Deepak stands acquitted from charge u/s. 10 of POCSO Act.
9. In view of aforesaid fact, accused stands acquitted.
Original documents, if any retained be release to the surety of accused. However, accused is directed to furnish his personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/ with one surety of like amount in compliance of provisions of Section 437A Cr.P.C. within a week. File be consigned to record room.
ANNOUNCED IN OPEN COURT (SANJEEV KUMAR) ON 19.11.2013. ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE 01 (NORTH) ROHINI:DELHI.
STATE VS DEEPAK FIR NO. 77/13//SC NO.103/13//PS-S.P. BADLI// U/S.- 342/354 IPC & 8 OF POCSO ACT PAGE 8 OF 8