Delhi District Court
State vs . Satish Kumar on 25 June, 2014
In The Court of Ms. Shefali Barnala Tandon, MM, Mahila Court, NW,
Rohini Courts, Delhi
State Vs. Satish Kumar
FIR No.175/09
U/s : 354/509/506(I)IPC
PS : Adarsh Nagar
JUDGMENT
S.No. of the Case : 146/27/12/09
Unique ID No. : 02404RO317022009
Date of Commission of offence : 08.08.2009
Name of the Complainant : Ms. Anupama
Name of the accused : Satish Kumar
S/o Shri Bhim Bahadur
R/o N9/B224, Lal Bagh,
Azad Pur, Delhi.
Offence Complained of : 354/509/506(I) IPC.
Plea of accused : Plead not guilty.
Date of order : 25.06.2014
Final order : Convicted u/s 354/509/506(I) IPC
Brief Reasons For Such Decision:
1. The brief facts of the case are that on 08.08.2009 at about 5:00 PM at Lal Bagh near the shop of Ram Aadhar, Azad Pur, Delhi within the jurisdiction of PS Adarsh Nagar accused Satish Kumar used criminal force against the complainant Ms. Anupama by holding her hand with intention to outrage her modesty. Secondly, on the said date, time and place accused uttered obscene words within the hearing of complainant with the intention to insult her modesty and also threatened the complainant to disfigure her face by pouring acid on her in case she would not accompany him and accordingly chargesheet was filed under section 354/509/506(I) IPC. FIR No.175/09 State V. Satish Page No. 1/ 9
2. After supplying documents to the accused notice for the commission of offence punishable U/s 354/509/506(I) IPC was framed against the accused to which accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. In support of its case, the prosecution has examined six witnesses namely (1) Ms. Anupama, (2) Smt. Mintoo Devi, (3) Ct. Sanjeev Kumar, (4) Sh. Chanderjit Kumar, (5) D.O / HC Surender Kumar and (6) Retired SI Kishan Lal PW1 Ms. Anupama (complainant) deposed that on 05.08.2009 in the noon hours, she was going to public toilets near Ram Leela Park, Azad Pur alongwith her mother and when they reached near hotel at garbage house, accused Satish started uttering obscene words and also misbehaved with her. She protested to the accused Satish and asked him to stop doing such things.
She further deposed that thereafter, on 08.08.2009 in the evening at about 5.00 PM when she was going to purchase milk and reached in front of the shop of one Ram Adhar, the accused Satish came there and forcibly caught hold of her hand and uttered obscene words and said that "Tujhe Mauj Masti Kara Lata Hoon." She rescued herself from the clutches of accused by pulling her hand. On this the accused Satish threatened by saying that, "To Agar Mere Saath Mauj Masti karne Nahi Chalegi to Tere Upar Tezab Daal Kar Tera Chehra Bigad Doonga." Then she cried for help and on this accused fled FIR No.175/09 State V. Satish Page No. 2/ 9 away from the spot by saying that, "Main Tujhe Baad Mein Dekh Loonga". Thereafter, she went to her house and narrated the whole incident to her mother and also to her brothers. Then she alongwith her mother went to PS Adarsh Nagar and narrated the whole incident to the police. Police recorded her statement which is Ex.PW1/A bearing her signature at point A. Thereafter she alongwith police went to the spot and police prepared the site plan at her instance which is Ex.PW1/B. Then she alongwith her father and police officials went to trace the accused and when they reached near Subji Market Chowk, Lal Bagh Azad Pur, she saw the accused Satish standing there and she told this to her father and as well as to police officials. At her pointing out the accused was apprehended by the police. The accused was arrested by the police vide arrest memo Ex.PW1/C. His personal search was also conducted vide memo Ex.PW1/D. Police also recorded her supplementary statement. She correctly identified the accused who was present in the Court.
During crossexamination, she stated that she has told to the IO that she was going to public toilet near Ramleela Park alongwith her mother but she admitted that in her statement Ex.PW1/A the fact of presence of her mother has not been mentioned. She denied the suggestion that no such incident nearby the toilet happened at the spot at the alleged date and time. She further expressed her inability to tell whether the incident nearby the toilet and that near the shop of Ram Aadhar is of the same day or on different days as 45 years have lapsed.
PW2 Smt. Mintoo Devi, mother of the complainant deposed FIR No.175/09 State V. Satish Page No. 3/ 9 that on 5th August 2009 in the noon hours, she alongwith her daughter Anupama was going to public toilets near Ram Leela Park, Azad Pur, and when they reached near hotel at garbage house, the accused Satish started uttering obscene words and also misbehaved with her daughter. She further deposed that she protested to the accused Satish and asked him to stop doing such things. Being neighbour they took no action against the accused Satish on that day.
Thereafter, on 08.08.2009 in the evening at about 05.15 PM her daughter reached at house and narrated the incident to her.
She was not was cross examined despite opportunity given. PW3 Ct. Sanjeev Kumar deposed that on 08.08.2009 he was posted at PS Adarsh Nagar. On that day the duty officer of PS Adarsh Nagar handed over him the copy of FIR and rukka to be handed over to IO SI Kishan Lal. On receiving the same he went to the spot i.e. Lal Bagh and handed over the same to the IO. Thereafter, the accused was arrested from Subji Mandi chowk, Lal Bagh arrest memo already Ex.PW1/C bearing his signature at point B. His personal search was conducted vide personal search memo Ex.PW1/D bearing my signature at point B. IO recorded his statement.
PW4 Sh. Chanderjit Kumar (father of the complainant) deposed that on 08.08.2009 he was doing his private job and on that day, when he returned back to his home at about 6:00 PM he could not find his daughter and his wife at his above mentioned address and thereafter, he asked from nearby and they told him that his wife and daughter had gone to FIR No.175/09 State V. Satish Page No. 4/ 9 PS Adarsh Nagar. Thereafter, he went to PS Adarsh Nagar and they all came back at above mentioned address where her daughter Anupama narrated the incident to him.
PW5 DO/HC Surender Kumar proved computerized copy of the FIR as Ex.PW5/A (OSR). He further proved endorsement made on rukka as Ex.PW5/B. After registration of FIR he handed copy of FIR and original rukka to Ct. Sanjeev.
PW6 Retired SI Kishan Lal deposed that on 08.08.2009, he was on Emergency Duty. On that day, Kumari Anupama alognwith her mother Smt. Mintoo Devi arrived at PS and got recorded her statement. Same is already Ex.PW1/A. He further deposed that he endorsed her statement and prepared rukka and handed over the same to the Duty Officer for registration of the case. Thereafter, he alongwith complainant and her mother reached at the spot at Lal Bagh. Therefore, father of the complainant Sh.Chanderjit also arrived at the spot. He inspected the spot and at the instance of complainant, prepared site plan. Same is already Ex.PW1/B. He further deposed that he recorded statements of the witnesses. In the meantime, Ct. Sanjeev Kumar arrived at the spot and handed over original rukka and copy of FIR to him. Thereafter, he alongwith Ct. Sanjeev Kumar, complainant Anupama and her father Chanderjit went in search of accused at B244, Lal Bagh at the residence of the accused. But the accused was not found. Thereafter, they FIR No.175/09 State V. Satish Page No. 5/ 9 went to Subzi Mandi, Lal Bagh, in search of the accused, accused was coming from the front side. The accused was duly identified by the complainant and her father. He further deposed that he interrogated him and arrested him vide memo Ex.PW1/C bearing his signature at point X. Personal search of accused was conducted vide memo Ex.PW1/D thereafter accused was released on bail. After bail accused started threatening the complainant Anupama and action was taken against him u/s 107/151 Cr.P.C. Statements of the witnesses were recorded, after completing the investigation challan was filed in the Court through SHO.
He was crossexamined at length. However, no material discrepancy found during his crossexamination. PE was closed.
4. Accused was examined U/s. 313 Cr.PC wherein all the incriminating evidence on record alongwith documents were put to him to which his stand was of general denial. However, he chose not to lead evidence in his defence.
5. I have heard Ld. APP for the State and Ld. Counsel for the accused persons. The record has also been perused carefully.
6. To bring home the guilt of the accused U/s 354 IPC, the prosecution was required to prove:
i) that the person assaulted was a female;
ii) that the accused assaulted or used criminal force against FIR No.175/09 State V. Satish Page No. 6/ 9 her;
iii) that he intended thereby to outrage her modesty; or that he knew it to be likely that he would thereby outrage her modesty.
As far as allegations qua 509/506(I) IPC are concerned, reliance has been placed on Sadhu Singh Vs. State of Punjab, 1997 (3) Crimes 55, Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court wherein it is observed that:
"In a criminal trial,it is for the prosecution to establish its case beyond all reasonable doubts. It is for the prosecution to travel the entire distance from may have to must have. If the prosecution appears to be improbably or lacks 'credibility', benefits of doubt necessarily has to go to accused".
7. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the testimony of the witnesses and perused the entire material on record carefully.
The Complainant has given a clear and categoric statement before the court to the effect that on the day of incident, she was going to public toilets near Ram Leela Park, Azad Pur alongwith her mother and when they reached near hotel at garbage house, the accused Satish started uttering obscene words and also misbehaved with her. She FIR No.175/09 State V. Satish Page No. 7/ 9 protested to the accused Satish and asked him to stop doing such things. Thereafter on 08.08.2009 in the evening at about 5:00 PM when she was going to purchase milk and reached in front of the shop of one Ram Aadhar the accused Satish came there and forcibly caught hold of her hand and uttered obscene words and said that "tujhe mauj masti kara lata hoon" . When she rescued herself from the clutches of accused by pulling her hand. On this the accused Satish threatened by saying that, "to agar mere saath mauj masti karne nahi chalegi to tere upar tezab daal kar tera chehra bigad doonga". Then she cried for help and on this the accused fled away from the spot by saying that " Main tujhe baad mein dekh loonga". Further accused has been categorically identified by the Complainant in the Court and there is no dispute about the identity of the accused.
8. Perusal of record shows that PW2 Smt. Mintoo Devi and PW4 Chanderjit Kumar are only hear say witnesses whereas PW3 Ct. Sanjeev Kumar, PW5 DO/HC Surender Kumar and PW6 Retired SI Kishan Lal are only formal witnesses. However, the testimony of complainant inspires confidence and despite her lengthy crossexamination by the defence, the defence is not able to impeach the credit of witness. Time and again it has been laid down by superior courts in catena of judgments that quality of witness is important and not the quantity. The testimony of the complainant is without any discrepancy and is found to be cogent & inspires the confidence FIR No.175/09 State V. Satish Page No. 8/ 9 of the Court & there is no reason to disbelieve the same & there is no material inconsistency & contradictions in her statements.
9. In view of the aforesaid discussion, it can safely be concluded that the Prosecution has successfully proved a case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt for the commission of offence punishable U/s 354/509/506(I)IPC. Consequently, accused is hereby convicted for the offence U/s 354/509/506(I) IPC.
Announced and dictated in the open Court today i.e. on 25th June, 2014 (Shefali Barnala Tandon) MM, Mahila Court, North West Rohini Courts,Delhi FIR No.175/09 State V. Satish Page No. 9/ 9