Delhi District Court
State vs 1. Vikas Ahuja @ Hunny S/O Sh Parvesh ... on 16 February, 2010
1
IN THE COURT OF SHRI J.P.S.MALIK
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE/SOUTH & SOUTH-EAST
PATIALA HOUSE COURT, NEW DELHI
SC No.44/07
FIR No. 162/06
PS : H.N.Din
State Vs 1. Vikas Ahuja @ Hunny S/o Sh Parvesh Ahuja
R/o A-24 Ram Nagar near South Anakeal,
Shahdara, New Delhi.
2. Satish Bhardwaj S/o Sh Nanak Chand
R/o A-3/10 JJ Camp
Tigri, New Delhi.
3. Parveen @ Mehak W/o Javed Ahmed
R/o R-35 1st Floor, Double Storey Flats
Jangpura Extension, New Delhi.
Date of Institution : 12.07.2007
Date when arguments
were heard : 08.02.2010
Date of judgment : 16.02.2010
J U D G M E N T
All three accused were chargesheeted for offences punishable u/s 372/373/366A/34 IPC as well as u/s 4/5/6/7/9 of ITP Act. The case of the prosecution as per the chargesheet filed is that the complainant hereinafter called the 'victim' was a minor girl of accused no. 3, Praveen @ Mehak, and she alongwith co- accused had forced the victim into prostitution and was 2 thrusting prostitution on the victim. The victim with the assistance of two of her friends and an Advocate made a complaint to the police on 2.3.2006, when the victim was taken to PS Farsh Bazar, Shahdara, Delhi and from their, the complainant was brought to PS H.N.Din as accused no. 3 Praveen @ Mehak was residing in the area under jurisdiction of PS H.N.Din.
2. All three accused were charged for offences punishable u/s 366A/34 IPC, u/s 372/34 IPC as well as u/s 373/34 IPC. Further, all the three accused were charged for offences punishable u/s 4/5/6/7 and 9 of ITP Act. All three accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. Prosecution has examined fifteen witnesses in order to substantiate the allegations, against the accused persons.
4. PW-1 is Vikas Goel, Advocate, who has deposed that on 2.3.2006, he was approached by his friends Jatin and Sanchit, who had brought a girl, who is victim, at his house cum residence and told him that 3 the victim had been thrown in prostitution by her own mother and she had been sold to one person named Satish, who is accused no. 2. A call was made at telephone no. 100 by PW-1, and then the victim and her friends were taken to PS Farsh Bazar.
5. PW-2 is the victim herself, has not supported the case of the prosecution and deposed that she was having friendship with a boy named Sanchit and both of them wanted to marry each other which was not liked by her mother as they belonged to different castes. Victim also deposed that both the accused Satish and Vikas, were good friends of her mother and when they saw the victim with Sanchit, they informed her mother, because of which certain restrictions were put on the movements of the victim by her mother, accused no. 3 Praveen @ Mehak. Then the victim deposed that she was instigated by her friend Sanchit, to make allegations against her mother and co-accused for having been thrown in prostitution, as they were coming in between their marriage. The victim was cross examined on behalf of Ld Addl. PP but she did not support the case of the prosecution at all.
4
6. PW-3 is SI Vijay Shanker and has deposed that on 2.3.2006, he was working as SI at PS Farsh Bazar was on emergency duty from 8 PM to 8 AM, when DD NO. 30 was received by him and then he went to DCP Office, East, Farsh Bazar, where on the gate of the office, he met PW-1 Vikas Goel, one girl, the victim, and two boys Jatin and Sanchit. After inquiry, it was revealed that matter pertained to PS H.N.Din and then after information was given, SI Manoj Kumar from PS H.N.Din, came and took the victim, her friends and an Advocate to PS H.N.Din.
7. PW-4 is Jatin Sharma and has deposed that two days prior to his birthday in the month of January 2006, he alongwith his friends Sanchit had gone to a Disco where victim met, who was also invited for the birthday party on 16.1.2006, the victim came thereafter and Sanchit met each other 4-5 times and later on, Sanchit and Jatin were called by the victim near Appu Ghar, where she disclosed that she was not interested in living with her mother as her mother wanted her to earn her livelihood by prostitution. PW-4 deposed that 5 then victim, he himself and Sanchit went to their friend, Vikas Goel, an Advocate, complaint was made to the police and they had also gone to the PS Farsh Bazar alongwith the victim.
8. PW-5 is HC Veer Pal and has deposed that he joined the investigation of the case alongwith SI Saroj Bala on 4.3.2006 and on the pointing out of the victim, her mother Praveen @ Mehak was apprehended from R-35 Jangpura. PW-5 also joined investigation of the case on 6.3.2006, on which date, the other two accused were apprehended and arrested by SI Saroj Bala and other police officials from Freedom Fighter Colony, Saket, New Delhi.
9. PW-6 is Ct. Santosh, who had taken the victim to AIIMS Hospital on 6.3.2006 for her medical examination. The witness had also accompanied the complainant, who had gone to the house of accused Praveen @ Mehak on 4.3.2006 and has deposed as regard the circumstances in which the accused no. 3 Praveen @ Mehak was arrested.
6
10. PW-7 HC Sunil Kumar was handed over the rukka of the case by SI Saroj Bala on 3.3.2006 and he had taken the rukka to PS for registration of the case.
11. PW-8 is SI Manoj Kumar, who had gone to PS Farsh Bazar on 3.3.2006, after receiving the information of a complaint being made by the victim against her mother as well as other accused, has brought the victim to PS H.N.Din alongwith her friends and an advocate who were produced by him before Addl. SHO, V.P.Dahiya. PW-8 also joined investigation of the case on 6.3.2006 alongwith SI Saroj Bala to whom the investigation of the case was entrusted, and has deposed as regard the arrest of accused no. 1 and 2 at the instance of accused Praveen @ Mehak from Freedom Fighter Colony, house no. B-96. The witness has also deposed as regard the arrest, disclosure statement etc., made by the accused persons.
12. PW-9 is HC Parvesh Kumar, who had accompanied SI Saroj Bala on 5.3.2006, to the house of accused Praveen @ Mehak and certain articles like refrigerator, cooler, TV, chair Almirah etc., were seized vide memo 7 Ex. PW9/A from the house of accused Praveen @ Mehak.
13. PW-10 is SI Saroj Bala, who had conducted investigation of the case. PW-10 deposed that she was handed over the investigation of the case on 3.3.2006, on which date, she recorded the statement of the victim Ex. PW2/A, made endorsement Ex. PW10/A and got the case registered. PW-10 then deposed that thereafter, she alongwith SI Manoj Kumar, HC Bir Pal and lady Ct. Santosh went to R-35, 1st Floor, Double Storey Flats, Jangpura alongwith the victim where accused no. 3 Praveen @ Mehak was arrested. Victim was got medically examined. Statement Ex. PW5/A made by accused Praveen @ Mehak has been proved by this witness. PW-10 SI Saroj Bala also arrested accused Vikas Ahuja and Satish Bhardwaj on 6.3.2006. Statement of the victim u/s 164 Cr.P.C. was also got recorded pursuant to an application dated 4.3.2006, moved by the witness. PW- 10 also deposed that on 5.3.2006, she had seized articles from house no. R-35, 1st Floor, Jangpura which were produced by accused Praveen @ Mehak and the articles were Almirah, TV, cooler etc. 8
14. PW-11 ASI Satyavir had deposed on the formal point of recording of FIR in the case.
15. PW-12 Dr Ankur has deposed on behalf of Dr Pooja, who had given the X-ray report as regard the bony age of the victim which was found to be more than 14 years and less than 17 years as per X-ray report Ex. PW12/A.
16. PW-13 is Sanchit Kumar Jain, another friend of the victim and has also deposed on the lines of PW-4 Jatin.
17. PW-14 is Dr Arvind, who had proved the MLC of the victim Ex. PW14/A, who was examined by Dr Suman.G and has since left the services of AIIMS Hospital.
18. PW-15 is Ms Vrinda Kumar, ld MM, by whom the statement of the victim was recorded on 8.3.2006 u/s 164 Cr.P.C. by whom the statement of the victim Ex. PW15/A was proved.
19. All the three accused were examined and their 9 statements recorded u/s 313 Cr.P.C., and all three accused persons denied the allegations and stated that they have been falsely implicated in the case. No witness was examined by any of the accused in their defence.
20. The case of the prosecution was totally based on the allegations being made by the victim as regard her bring thrown into the profession of prostitution by her mother being accused no. 3 Praveen @ Mehak and the victim has totally betrayed the case of the prosecution stating that she had made false allegations against the accused persons at the instance of her friend Sanchit. Both, PW-4 Jatin Sharma, who has accompanied the victim to PS Farsh Bazar as well as PW-13 Sanchit Kumar Jain against whom it is being alleged, now by the victim that she made allegations at his instance, had denied the allegations and stated that they had told PW-1, Vikas Goel, the Advocate about the facts disclosed to them by the victim and thereafter, they had only assisted the victim in initiating criminal proceedings against the accused persons. Since the victim is not 10 supporting the case of the prosecution and apart from the deposition of the victim there is no evidence on record to prove that the victim was being used and forced to have illicit intercourse by the accused persons and also there is no evidence on the record that she was being employed and used for the purpose of the prostitution or that she was to be used for the purpose of the prostitution or illicit intercourse or any other unlawful and immoral purpose by the accused persons and so the allegations of the accused living on the earnings of the victim from prostitution. Prosecution has not been able to bring sufficient evidence on record to link the accused persons with the allegations against them. Accordingly, all the three accused persons are acquitted of charge u/s 366A/34 IPC, u/s 372/34 IPC as well as u/s 373/34 IPC. Further, all the three accused persons are also acquitted of charge u/s 4/5/6/7 and 9 of ITP Act.
Announced in the open
court on 16.02.2010 (J.P.S.MALIK)
ASJ/South District