Delhi District Court
State vs Narender on 3 April, 2018
IN THE COURT OF MS. RICHA GUSAIN SOLANKI:
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE (SOUTH WEST)-01, MAHILA
COURT, DWARKA, NEW DELHI
State Vs Narender
FIR No. 272/2013
PS Kapashera
CC No. 423950-2016
Date of institution of case : 11.04.2016
Date on which case reserved for judgment : 13.03.2018
Date of judgment : 03.04.2018
JUDGMENT U/s 354D/506 IPC:
a) Date of offence : On and before 05.11.2013
b) Offence complained of : Section 354D/506 IPC
c) Name of complainant : Ms. H (name with-held, case being u/s 354D IPC)
d) Name of accused, his : Narender
parentage, local & s/o Sh. Dayanand
permanent residence r/o VPO Bijwasan, New Delhi-110061.
e) Plea of accused : Accused is falsely implicated
f) Final order : Accused Narender is acquitted for the offences under
Section 354D/506 IPC
1.Briefly stated the case of the prosecution is that on 05.11.2012, ASI Ranvir Singh received DD No. 38B upon which he along with HC Manjeet reached the hosue of complainant Ms. H. She gave her statement that on that day at around 06.00 p.m, accused Narender Rana who lives in her village, came on his motorcycle and starting blowing his State Vs Narender FIR No. 272/2013 PS : Kapashera Page no. 1/5 horn loudly. She stated that he is harassing for two years; he follows her, blows horn outside her house, throws fire crackers at her house and threatens her that he will kill her and her brother if she does not establish relation with him.
Accordingly, the present FIR was registered for the offence u/s 354B/506 IPC.
2. Arguments on charge were heard and charge for the offence u/s 354D/506 IPC was framed against accused. He pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. Prosecution examined three witnesses in its support:
3.1. PW-1/complainant entered the witness box on 20.01.2017 and deposed that about 3 years ago, accused came to her house on his bike and blew horn loudly. He had been doing so for about one year to persuade her to be friends with him. He used to threaten her that he will throw acid on her or torture her with his acts, if she does not accept his friendship. On the day of bhai-dooj, she dialed at 100 number after the incident. Police recorded her statement Ex.PW1/A, prepared site plan Ex.PW1/B. Police arrested accused vide memo Ex.PW1/C and conducted his personal search vide memo Ex.
PW1/D. She identified the accused correctly.
In her cross-examination, she stated that the house of one Samullah is in front of her house and he is friend of accused. She said that she was not sure if accused was blowing horn to call his friend or to tease her. She stated that she was not directly threatened by accused but he had told her friend.
3.2. PW-2/HC Manjeet Kumar entered the witness box on 13.03.2018 and deposed that State Vs Narender FIR No. 272/2013 PS : Kapashera Page no. 2/5 he and IO went to the spot on receipt of DD No. 38B dated 05.11.2013. He stated that the rukka was sent through him by IO for registration of FIR. He along with IO, complainant and her brother searched for accused and found him and arrested him at around 10:00 pm. He identified the accused correctly.
In his cross-examination, he admitted that the arrest memo and search memo did not bear his signatures. He admitted that he house of complainant was not shown in the site plan. He stated that the accused was arrested from his house. 3.3. PW-3/ASI Ranvir Singh entered the witness box on 13.03.2018 and deposed that he and HC Manjeet went to the spot on receipt of DD No. 38B dated 05.11.2013. He recorded that statement of complainant and prepared rukka Ex.PW3/A for registration of FIR. He prepared site plan and arrested accused. He seized motorcycle of accused vide memo Ex.PW3/B. He identified the accused correctly.
In his cross-examination, he stated that no fire crackers were seized by him.
4. Statement of accused under Section 281 r/w 313 Cr.PC. was recorded wherein he denied all the allegations against him. Accused chose not to lead evidence in defense.
5. I have heard Ld. APP for State and Ld. Counsel for accused.
6. In order to prove offence u/s 354D IPC prosecution had to prove that accused stalked the complainant by following her and attempting to foster personal interaction with her, despite clear indication of dis-interest by her.
7. PW1 deposed that accused had been bothering her for about one year. However State Vs Narender FIR No. 272/2013 PS : Kapashera Page no. 3/5 she narrated only one specific incident, that is of bhai-dooj when accused came to her house on his bike and blew horn loudly. Per contra, she also admitted in her cross- examination that the house of friend of accused is in front of her house and that she was not sure if accused was blowing horn to call his friend or to tease her.
As such, it is unclear whether accused was trying to foster interaction with complainant by blowing the horn of his motorcycle or he was calling his friend Samullah.
8. No other incident of stalking was described by the complainant. PW1 has only vaguely mentioned that accused had been trying to be friends with her for one year.
9. Further to prove offence under Section 506 IPC, prosecution had to prove that accused criminally intimidated the complainant. PW1 initially deposed that accused used to threaten her that he will throw acid on her or torture her, if she does not accept his friendship but later stated that she was not directly threatened by accused. She was re- examined by Ld APP and she re-iterated that accused had told her friend that he will attack the complainant with acid or torture her. She clarified that accused never threatened her directly. Now the question remains as to when this threat was extended and through which friend. There is no mention of any friend in the entire charge sheet and therefore, none has been examined.
10. As such, the case of prosecution leaves many unanswered questions. Prosecution has not been establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt for the offence under Section 354D/506 IPC.
State Vs Narender FIR No. 272/2013 PS : Kapashera Page no. 4/5
11. Accordingly, accused Narender is acquitted for the offence under Section 354D/506 IPC.
12. Copy of the judgment be given free of cost to accused.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ( RICHA GUSAIN SOLANKI ) TODAY ON 03rd April, 2018 MM-01(SW), Mahila Court Dwarka/Delhi Digitally signed by RICHA RICHA GUSAIN GUSAIN SOLANKI SOLANKI Date: 2018.04.03 01:47:24 +0500 State Vs Narender FIR No. 272/2013 PS : Kapashera Page no. 5/5