Delhi District Court
Sc No: 644/17 State vs . Subodh Kumar Singh on 3 May, 2018
SC No: 644/17 State Vs. Subodh Kumar Singh
IN THE COURT OF SH. GAUTAM MANAN
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE-FAST TRACK
SOUTH-WEST, DWARKA, NEW DELHI
In the matter of:-
S. C. No. 644/17
FIR No. 699/16
Police Station Dabri
Under Section 376/384/506 IPC
State
Versus
Subodh Kumar Singh
S/o Mahendra Singh
R/o H. No. D-7-B/1, D-Block,
New Janki Puri, New Delhi .....Accused
Date of institution 01.11.2017
Judgment reserved on 20.04.2018
Judgment Pronounced on 03.05.2018
Decision Acquitted
Judgment Page No 1 of 16
SC No: 644/17 State Vs. Subodh Kumar Singh
JUDGMENT
1. Accused Subodh Kumar Singh is facing trial on the allegations of committing rape upon prosecutrix and extending threats to her.
2. FIR in question was registered on 03.10.2016 on a written complaint of prosecutrix pursuant to application filed by prosecutrix under Section 156(3) Cr.P..C wherein prosecutrix alleged that accused became her friend during their studies. Thereafter, accused took her photographs and started blackmailing her. Prosecutrix alleged that accused started pressurizing her to establish physical relations with him and established physical relations with her after extending threat that he would make her photographs viral. Then on 27.03.2015 accused took prosecutrix to Tis Hazari Court. Under threat prosecutrix married accused in Arya Samaj Mandir. Accused snatched marriage certificate from prosecutrix. Prosecutrix further alleged that accused took Rs 1.5 lacs in cash from her and threatens her to give Rs20 lacs and gold Judgment Page No 2 of 16 SC No: 644/17 State Vs. Subodh Kumar Singh jewelery to him and if prosecutrix will not give this much then he would make nude photograph of prosecutrix viral. Prosecutrix alleged that accused wants to make a porn film. She alleged that for last time accused called her and told prosecutrix to establish physical relations with three boys, prosecutrix managed to escape from there and after reaching her house, prosecutrix narrated entire incidents to her family members. Prosecutrix alleged that accused is still stalking her and harassing her family members and as such an action be taken against him.
3. Prosecutrix was got counseled and was medically examined. Her statement was got recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C. Accused joined the investigation. He was charge-sheeted. Charge for offence punishable U/s 376/506 (II)/384 IPC was framed against accused Subodh Kumar Singh. Accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. Prosecution examined 4 witnesses.
Judgment Page No 3 of 16
SC No: 644/17 State Vs. Subodh Kumar Singh
5. PW1 prosecutrix supported prosecution case and deposed on the lines of her complaint. She proved her complaint Ex. PW1/A, her medical examination vide MLC Ex. PW/B and her statement recorded u/s 164 Cr. P.C. as Ex. PW1/C and Whatsapp Chat between her and accused consisting of 12 pages as Ex. PW1/D-1 to D12.
6. PW2 sister of prosecutrix deposed that in 2015, she met accused when he came to her house following prosecutrix. Accused called her and informed that he has married prosecutrix. Then she talked to prosecutrix who informed her that accused was having some photographs and he was blackmailing prosecutrix and under pressure prosecutrix married accused.
7. PW3 WSI Kamlesh Investigating Officer deposed that on the basis of complaint of prosecutrix, she collected certificate of marriage with prosecutrix, registration certificate of marriage and five photographs vide seizure memo Ex. PW3/A. Judgment Page No 4 of 16 SC No: 644/17 State Vs. Subodh Kumar Singh
8. PW4 WSI Chanderkanta, Investigating Officer deposed on the basis of complaint, She got prosecutrix medically examined and got recorded statement of prosecutrix u/s 164 Cr. P.C and remaining investigations were conducted by SI Kamlesh.
9. Accused gave a statement admitting FIR in question, certificate U/s 65-B Indian Evidence Act, his medical examination and of prosecutrix. Accused admitted statement of prosecutrix recorded U/s 164 Cr.P.C as well. Marriage certificates issued by Arya Samaj Mandir and Registrar of marriage. In view of his statement, relevant witnesses to prove the aforesaid documents were dropped from array of witnesses.
10. Statement of accused was recorded U/s 313 Cr.P.C. wherein he stated that prosecutrix was having affair with him. Prosecutrix voluntarily married him and thereafter, refused to join his company under pressure from her family. He did not take any Judgment Page No 5 of 16 SC No: 644/17 State Vs. Subodh Kumar Singh pictures of prosecutrix nor established physical relations with her against her consent nor took any money from prosecutrix. Under family pressure she has falsely implicated him.
11. It is contended on behalf of accused it is evident from testimony of prosecutrix that she voluntarily married accused and thereafter, refused to join his company under pressure from her family. It is contended that when prosecutrix was served with the notice to join company of accused she filed a false complaint. It is contended that there is no evidence on record that accused took any pictures of prosecutrix or established physical relations with her. It is argued that testimony of prosecutrix is neither truthful nor worthy of credence.
12. On the other hand Ld Addl. PP submits that prosecutrix in all her statements categorically stated that accused established physical relations with her under threat and after blackmailing her. It is argued that no material contradiction has Judgment Page No 6 of 16 SC No: 644/17 State Vs. Subodh Kumar Singh come in testimony of prosecutrix and as such case against accused stands proved beyond any reasonable doubt.
13. I have given thoughtful consideration to arguments advanced at bar and perused the entire material on record.
14. Versions of prosecutrix: Loose English translation of statement of prosecutrix Ex. PW1/C recorded u/s 164 Cr. P.C. reads as under:-
"In 2014 I met Subodh. He took my number from my Business Law Madam on pretext of notes. We started talking to each other. We used to roam around. He used to take my photos. Sometimes used to take photos after suddenly hugging me. I used to push him then he used to say that he has done it by mistake. In 2014 he started telling me to be physical that " I like you, you also like me and for this reason we are roaming together for so many days". I refused him then he showed me that picture in which he had kept his hand on me. In that his hand was on my breast. I told that I got deleted this, he stated that it was just to show you, if you will not be my girl-friend then will upload it on internet and would show it in your house. In order to get the photos deleted, I consented. Before, 23.03.2015 in Jan 2015 he took me to his friend's house in Nangloi. 3-4 Judgment Page No 7 of 16 SC No: 644/17 State Vs. Subodh Kumar Singh boys were present there then he returned. He told me that his friend and family is there to which I ask how does it matter. He told that "I came with you to be physical and my friend had told me nobody is there. I fought with him that I refused to be physical. Next day, he met me in a park and started forcing me to be physical. I told that I will go to police, he stated that" you do not have courage, by the time you will reach police station, your photos would get online. I became fearful. We started arguing. He did not allow me to go home and an uncle helped me. Next day when we went on coaching then he again forced me to be physical. He said, "think about you and your family" and I told him that I will approach police, then we fought and I went home.
On 23.03.2015 he called me in a park to talk to me. I told him that I am coming, you do not upload photos. He again threatened me that he will upload my photos on social networking and will throw acid on my face because you are proud of your beauty. We fought. He stated that he will upload through his phone otherwise do it as I say. He took me in the bushes of Budha Jayanti Park and got physical with me, means had sex with me and also took my photographs. Due to fear I did not disclose it to anybody. On 27.03.2015 he called me at Uttam Nagar Metro Station. On pretext of going to District Centre he took me to Kashmere Gate and stated that were have come here to marry. I was shocked, stated if you say yes or No, I have made arrangement and if you will not consent, notice will be sent to your house that you have not reached to marry. He made me to talk to Neetu Judgment Page No 8 of 16 SC No: 644/17 State Vs. Subodh Kumar Singh Vats, Advocate who stated that if you do not want to marry then should come and file cancellation certificate, so that, notice is not sent to your house. I talked to Neetu madam in isolation then "she told me to marry him and then delete your photographs. Then come on next day with certificate and tear it and we will not forward our records. There will be no record of marriage." But Subodh got suspicious and he snatched marriage certificate from my hand. Next day on some pretext I wanted to take marriage certificate but he did not give. For 3-4 days we argued.
On 06.04.2015 Subodh again called me at Tis Hazari. I went there. He stated that marriage has to be registered. On pretext of filling forms he had already taken my papers. He took me to the office of Neetu madam. Madam sent him back on that day and stated that after registration if you wanted to get separated then you will land in legal tangle.
Subodh blackmailed me that he will sent my photographs and Arya Samaj certificate to my house. I made him understand but he did not agree.
I also told Neetu madam I do not want registration but nothing happened. Marriage got registered. Then he used to daily pressurize me to be physical. I got fed up with his threats and by making excuses I started maintaining distance from him. He understood. Once he demanded Rs. 5 lakhs. Earlier also he had taken Rs 10,000/- from him when his laptop got stolen. On 23.03.2015 he demanded Rs. 19,000/-, from him to get marriage registered. Under pressure I had to give.
Judgment Page No 9 of 16
SC No: 644/17 State Vs. Subodh Kumar Singh
He threatened me to give Rs. 5 lakhs otherwise you will be defamed. He stated that nobody would listen me. He stated " give Rs. 5 lakhs then he would burn all documents then you had your way and me on my own." I stated I will think over it. Next day again he demanded. I got frustrated. I refused him. He called my sister but did not state her anything. He had taken my SIM from my bag and got phone numbers of all my relatives. He used to make blank calls to my relatives and irritate them and pressurize me to come. He talked to my sister and when my didi asked "Are you married" then he stated yes. Then my sister asked me. I had got tired and then narrated all facts. Then we contacted an Advocate and started legal process. When I met him for the last time he told me " I will get you work in Mango TV of Bhojpuri channel and he is collaborating with YouTube and going to launch a channel. He has also hacked my gmail and facebook IDs and through it he used to chat with my relatives."
15. Main gist of allegations leveled against accused by prosecutrix are that accused blackmailed prosecutrix on the basis of some photographs taken by him and then pressurized her to establish physical relations with him and also to marry him.
Judgment Page No 10 of 16
SC No: 644/17 State Vs. Subodh Kumar Singh
16. During her cross examination, prosecutrix in this regard deposed as under:-
"It is correct that the photographs Ex. PW1/X8 to X18 are of me and accused. Vol. These photographs were taken when accused was just my friend and accused was in habit of suddenly coming near to me and taking selfies. It is correct that some of these photographs are selfies taken by me but in these I was taking my selfies and accused is appearing suddenly from behind. These photographs were before sexual assault took place."
17. It is evident from her testimony that photographs were not only taken by accused but prosecutrix also used to take selfies in which accused is appearing. Prosecutrix admitted during her cross examination that prosecutrix went with accused to Budha Garden, she saw some photographs which were clicked by accused but she did not see those photographs from near and nor she received those photographs on her phone.
18. Prosecutrix claims that accused was blackmailing her on the basis of some photographs but prosecution is unable to produce any objectionable photographs of prosecutrix and Judgment Page No 11 of 16 SC No: 644/17 State Vs. Subodh Kumar Singh accused. Prosecutrix admitted that at no point of time she lodged any complaint against accused when he clicked her nude photographs.
19. Prosecutrix got married to accused on 27.03.2015 in Arya Samaj temple. At the time of her marriage, prosecutrix admitted having executed a note Ex PW1/X-1 dated 27.03.2015 and it reads as under:-
"I ... d/o ... aaj dinak 27.03.2015 ko mai Arya Samaj Mandir Delhi me bina kisi dabav ke apni marzi se vivah kar rahi hu. Meri janam tithi 06.12.1993 hai jo ki vastavik hai. Mai apne ghar se koi bhi kimti saman va nagdi tatha jewelery lekar aai hu. Is vivah me do gawah hai (1) Meeta (2) Imtiaz Ahmed Ansari. Jinhe me avtogat rup se jaanti hu. Yeh vivah maine apne pure hosho hawas me kiya hai. Is vivah ki purn zimmedari meri apni hai."
20. Prosecutrix also executed an affidavit Ex. PW1/X-2 and in that affidavit prosecutrix mentions that she is marrying to accused of her own accord and free will and without any force or pressure. Though prosecutrix claims that accused forced her to marry him by blackmailing that he will upload his photographs on Judgment Page No 12 of 16 SC No: 644/17 State Vs. Subodh Kumar Singh Internet but as stated above no such photographs has been unearthed during the investigations of the case.
21. Nonetheless prosecutrix is an educated girl and was well aware that what are the consequences of marrying a person. If at all, accused was blackmailing and pressurizing her to marry her then prosecutrix could have easily told this fact to her family or could have lodged a police report but she did neither. Rather prosecutrix accompanied accused to marry in Arya Samaj Temple and not only this she produced all her relevant documents to solemnize her marriage with accused.
22. Only allegation made by prosecutrix against accused in respect of her sexual assault that accused took her to Budha Garden in March 2015 and established physical relations with her but the fact remains that if at all accused established physical relations with her against her consent then why did prosecutrix went ahead and married accused and got her marriage registered.
Judgment Page No 13 of 16
SC No: 644/17 State Vs. Subodh Kumar Singh
23. In her initial complaint Ex. PW1/A, prosecutrix mentions that when accused compelled her to be a part of porn film and also asked her to establish physical relations with three other boys, she came to her house and narrated the incident to her family members. However, no such fact is mentioned in her testimony.
24. Prosecutrix admits having filed a case u/s 12 of Hindu Marriage Act against accused and that goes to show that prosecutrix was very well aware about the consequences of the act of what she was doing. Photographs Ex. PW1/X-1 to X-18 indicate close and intimate relationship between prosecutrix and accused. Prosecutrix admits having married the accused and also at no point of time she lodged any complaint against accused when he allegedly established physical relations with her against her consent or was blackmailing her.
Judgment Page No 14 of 16
SC No: 644/17 State Vs. Subodh Kumar Singh
25. Entire facts of the case indicate that relationship between prosecutrix and accused was intimate. No reason is forthcoming as to why prosecutrix did not lodge any complaint against accused if at all he had committed rape upon her.
26. From above stated discussions it emerges that :
i) Prosecutrix married accused.
ii) There is no evidence that accused prepared her video or took her objectionable photographs nor there is any evidence to indicate that accused blackmailed prosecutrix.
iii) Testimony of prosecutrix that accused established physical relations with her at Budha Gaudern is not worthy of credence as prosecutrix even after alleged act married accused.
iv) No reasonable explanation is forthcoming as to why prosecutrix did not report the matter to police and her family members or why did she succumbed to the pressure exerted by accused.
v) There is no evidence on record to establish that accused obtained consent of prosecutrix for physical relations with her under any threat or coercion.
vi) There is no evidence to substantiate allegations of extortion against accused.
Judgment Page No 15 of 16
SC No: 644/17 State Vs. Subodh Kumar Singh
27. Conclusion: In the light of above discussions, it is held that prosecution has failed to bring on record clear, cogent and consistent evidence against accused. Accordingly, he is acquitted. His surety is discharged. Bail bond stands canceled.
Accused is directed to furnish a personal & surety bond in sum of Rs. 10,000/- under Section 437-A Cr.P.C which shall remain in force for period of six months.
File be consigned to record room after due compliance. Announced in the open court on 3rd day of May, 2018.
Digitally signed by GAUTAM GAUTAM MANAN GAUTAM MANAN Addl. Sessions Judge (SFTC) MANAN Date: 2018.05.05 South-West, Dwarka Courts, Delhi 15:40:45 +0530 Judgment Page No 16 of 16