Delhi District Court
State vs 1. Vikash Kumar on 8 March, 2018
-: 1 :-
IN THE COURT OF SH BHUPESH KUMAR, ADDITIONAL
SESSIONS JUDGE (SPECIAL FAST TRACK COURT)01,
WEST, TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI
Sessions Case No. 90/16
State Versus 1. Vikash Kumar
S/o Sh. Suresh Goyal
R/o Old Anaj Mandi, Near Satsang
Bhwan, Gohana, Distt. Sonepat,
Haryana.
2. Narender Kumar
S/o Sh.Jagdish
r/o H.No.3/144 Shiv Ram Park,
Nihal Vihar, Delhi.
FIR No. : 113/15
U/s : 376/342/506/34 IPC
Police Station : Nihal Vihar
DATE OF RECEIPT OF FILE
AFTER COMMITTAL: 23.11.2015
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 08.03.2018
JUDGMENT
1.Brief facts of the matter are that on receipt of complaint from prosecutrix (name mentioned in the file but withheld to protect her identity) FIR bearing no. 113/15, PS Nihal Vihar u/s Bhupesh Kumar ASJ (SFTC)-01, West THC, Delhi/08.03.2018 -: 2 :- 376/342/506/34 IPC was registered against accused Narender and Vikas. In the complaint prosecutrix has stated to the effect that she is married to accused Narender. Her brother coaccused Vikas used to visit her matrimonial house. In the year 2011 she alongwith her husband/accused Narender and coaccused Vikas went to Gurgaon where she got admitted in Arte T Mis Hospital. While she was admitted in hospital, her brother/accused Vikas forcibly established physical relations with her. Thereafter, whenever she had gone to Gurgaon for taking medicines, her brother/accused Vikas established physical relations with her. When prosecutrix told this fact to her husband/accused Narender, he replied that it makes no difference. Accused Vikas has established physical relations with the prosecutrix at the instance of her husband/accused Narender and accused Narender used to take money from accused Vikas for this act. The prosecutrix was medically examined at SGM Hospital. Then on the basis of complaint of prosecutrix, FIR U/S 376/342/506/34 IPC was registered against both accused Vikash and Narender. Investigation was carried out. Statement of witnesses u/s 161 Cr.P.C. and statement of prosecutrix u/s 164 Cr.P.C. was got recorded. After completing other formal investigation, chargsheet u/s 376/342/506/34 IPC was presented before the Ld. MM. After compliance of provision of Section 207 Cr.P.C., the matter Bhupesh Kumar ASJ (SFTC)-01, West THC, Delhi/08.03.2018 -: 3 :- was committed to Sessions Court by the Ld. M.M.
2. Vide order dated 28.11.2016, charge for offence under section 376 IPC was framed against the accused Vikas Kumar and charge for offence u/s 342/506/376/109 IPC was framed against accused Narender Kumar, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. In order to prove its case, the prosecution has examined the prosecutrix as PW1. However, she has not supported the case of prosecution and submitted that both accused persons have not committed any offence with her. The witness was cross examined by Ld. APP for State with permission of the Court on the ground that she was resiling from her earlier statement. However, even at the crossexamination of the prosecutrix, she has not deposed anything against any of the accused and has categorically stated that accused have not committed any offence against her. She has even denied to have made any such statement to police. In this respect she has submitted that she has not made any such statement to the police and police officials have recorded the statement at their own and simply asked her to put signature on Ex. PW1/A. In respect to her statement recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C., prosecutrix submitted that she has made such statement at asking of police officials.
Bhupesh Kumar ASJ (SFTC)-01, West THC, Delhi/08.03.2018 -: 4 :-
4. Since the prosecutrix, who was the only material witness in this matter, has not supported the case of the prosecution, therefore, no useful purpose would be served to examine the other remaining witnesses, who are formal in nature, viz doctors, IO etc. Therefore, the prosecution evidence has been closed by orders.
5. Since no incriminating material/evidence came on record against the accused persons, hence, the statement of accused u/s 313 Cr.P.C stands dispensed with. Bail bond and personal bond in view of provision of Section 437A Cr.P.C furnished by the accused persons and same are accepted for six months. Accordingly, accused Vikas Kumar is acquitted for the offence u/s 376 IPC and accused Narender Kumar is acquitted for offence u/s 342/506/376 r/w Section 109 IPC. Their earlier offence u/s 342/506/376 r/w Section 109 IPC. sureties stands discharged.
6. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced in the open Court on (BHUPESH KUMAR) this 8th March, 2018. Additional Sessions Judge, (Special Fast Track Court)01, West, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi Bhupesh Kumar ASJ (SFTC)-01, West THC, Delhi/08.03.2018