Delhi District Court
State vs Sonu Desta on 3 May, 2014
In the Court of Ms. Kaveri Baweja
Additional Sessions Judge Special FTC - 2 (Central)
Tis Hazari Courts: Delhi.
Sessions Case No. : 81/2013
Unique ID No. : 02401R0389602013
State versus Sonu Desta
S/o Sh. Negi Ram Desta
R/o Ravescans Pvt. Ltd.
A27, Industrial Area
PhaseII, Naryana,
Delhi
Case arising out of:
FIR No. : 138/2013
Police Station : Pahar Ganj
Under Section : 376 IPC
Judgment reserved on : 25.04.2014
Judgment pronounced on : 03.05.2014
JUDGMENT
Case of the Prosecution:
The case in hand was registered on the complaint of the Prosecutrix 'A' [name withheld to protect her identity], wherein she stated that about one month ago, she used to work in Universal Graphics at PhaseII, Naraina as Receptionist. She stated that Accused Sonu Desta used to work in a office which was opposite to her office and they became acquainted with each other. She alleged that Accused made a call on her mobile number 9717340127 from his mobile number 9560990004 on 11.05.2013 and stated that he wanted to marry her.
She alleged that on 18.05.2013 Accused Sonu Desta met her outside Kirti Nagar Metro Station and offered to drop her at her office. Prosecutrix alleged that Accused took her on his motorcycle and took her to Room No. 304 a hotel at Pahar Ganj stating that he had to talk to her urgently. She further alleged that Accused forcibly established physical relations with her without her consent and when she started crying, Accused assured that he would marry her and dropped her at Kirti Nagar Metro Station. She stated that she came to her house and did not disclose the incident to anyone due to fear. After gathering courage, she narrated the entire incident to her mother on 22.05.2013 who further told the same to her brother Praveen and her brother made a call at 100 number. Thereafter, she went alongwith her mother to PS Pahar Ganj and gave her written complaint.
On the basis of the aforesaid complaint, a case under Section 376 IPC was registered. During the course of investigation, site plan was prepared at the instance of the Prosecutrix. Prosecutrix was got medically examined at LHMC. Accused Sonu Desta was arrested. Accused was got medically examined at LHMC and exhibits duly sealed in a pulanda, were taken into police possession and were deposited in the malkhana.
On 24.5.13 statement of Prosecutrix was recorded by Ld. MM under Section 164 Cr.PC.
Statements of witnesses were got recorded. Thereafter, upon completion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed before the court. Charges:
Upon committal of the case and on the basis of material on record, Accused Sonu Desta S/o Sh. Negi Ram Desta was charged for the offence under Sections 376 IPC to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
Prosecution Evidence:
In order to prove the guilt of Accused, Prosecution examined sixteen [16] witnesses on record.
PW1 Alam deposed that he is working as a Manager in Hotel LaBudha Guest House at Paharganj for the last 11 months. On 18.05.2013, Accused Sonu came to his hotel along with Prosecutrix. The witness correctly identified Accused and Prosecutrix present in court today. Accused asked him to provide a room and he was given Room No.
304. PW1 deposed that Accused asked him to made the entries in the register after seeing the room. Thereafter, Accused along with the Prosecutrix had gone to Room No. 304 and returned from the said room after about 45 minutes or one hour and thereafter, he along with the Prosecutrix had left the hotel after giving Rs. 600/. PW1 made the entries in day book instead of register as day to day transaction used to be maintained in the day book. When police along with Prosecutrix came to his hotel, he handed over copy of entry register, day book and digital video recorder to them, which were taken into police possession vide seizure memos Ex. PW1/A & Ex. PW1/B. PW1 further deposed that on 23.5.13 police officials came to his hotel along with the Accused and identified him to be the same person who came to his hotel along with the Prosecutrix on 18.05.2013 and stayed in Room No.304 for about one hour. His statements were recorded by the police officials.
PW2 Prosecutrix 'A' deposed that Accused used to work in one office which was opposite to her office while she used to work in Universal Graphics at Naraina PhaseII as Receptionist. She correctly identified Accused when produced in court.
She deposed that on 11.05.2013, she received a phone call on her mobile No.97173401247 from the Accused. He told her that his name is Rahul and that he wants to marry her. However, she did not talk to him and told him that she did not want to marry him. Accused continued to call her on 11.05.2013 and 12.05.2013. Seeing the number of calls, she talked to him in the evening of 12.05.2013 and he asked her to meet him near their office at Naraina. She met him near her office and thereafter, he dropped her at Kirti Nagar on his motorcycle. Accused used to come to her bus stand after her office hours. He revealed that his name is Sonu and that he is working in the office which is opposite to her office.
In the morning of 18.05.2013, Accused again called her and requested her to meet him. She refused for the same, but he kept on making calls and continuously insisted that she should meet him. On his persistent requests, she met him at Kirti Nagar Metro Station. He asked her to go out with him to which she refused stating that she has to go to her office. They also had a small quarrel as she did not want to go with him. Then, Accused told her that he will drop her at her office on his motorcycle. However, the Accused instead of taking her to her office, took her to Rajouri Garden stating that he wants to get some licence work done first. Then, she again asked him whether he would drop her to her office, otherwise she would go on her own. However, the Accused assured her that he would drop her at her office.
Instead of taking her to her office, Accused took her to one hotel at Paharganj. When the hotel Manager asked for her identify proof, she told him that the Accused had brought her there forcibly and the Manager refused to give them a room at the said hotel.
Thereafter, Accused took her to another hotel. She also asked the Accused as to why a room is required, but he did not give any proper answer and rather assured her that he would not do anything and also swore upon his mother. He took her to the 3rd floor of the said hotel and closed the door of that room. Thereafter, Accused removed all her clothes and also removed his clothes. She first continuously cried and tried to restrain the Accused, but he forcibly established sexual relations without her consent and raped her . Accused also used condom. She was unable to make any call from her mobile phone which was in her bag as the Accused did not allow her to do so.
On seeing her crying, Accused assured her that he will marry her. Thereafter, Accused dropped her at Kirti Nagar and from there she went to her house. She did not inform about the aforesaid incident due to fear of her parents. Finally on 22.05.2013, she confided in her mother and narrated all the facts to her. Her mother told all the facts to her brother who informed the police at no.100. Thereafter, police came to their house in the night. Thereafter, they had gone to PS and gave her complaint which is Ex. PW2/A. On her said complaint FIR of this case was registered by the police. Thereafter, they had gone to the said hotel where Accused committed rape with her and she pointed out the room to the police official. IO prepared site plan. From hotel, police took her to LHMC hospital where she was medically examined and thereafter, she had gone to PS where her statement was recorded by the police official.
PW2 Prosecutrix 'A' further deposed that on the next day of lodging the FIR while she was going to her office along with her mother to collect her dues, police officials met her while coming out from the office of Accused. They told her that Accused Sonu was not present in his office. She saw the Accused Sonu sitting in a nearby Tea Shop and on her identification police arrested Accused Sonu. Accused was interrogated by the IO and arrested vide arrest memo Ex. PW2/B. She also gave copy of age proof certificate which was seized by the IO vide seizure memo.
On 25/26.05.2013, she was produced before the Ld. MM, where her statement under Section 164 Cr.PC was recorded which is Ex. PW2/C. PW3 Dr. Apeksha conducted gynecological examination of Prosecutrix 'A' and gave her detailed report which is Ex. PW3/A. PW4 Dr. Jami Swathi medically examined Accused Sonu vide his report Ex. PW4/A and also collected the exhibits mentioned in the MLC and handed over the same to the police.
PW5 HC Ramesh Chand was the Duty Officer who recorded the FIR Ex. PW5/A and made endorsement on original rukka vide Ex. PW5/B. PW6 Amit Kumar deposed that on 18.5.13 he was working as Manager at Hotel J. M. Deluxe, Aarakashan Road, Pahar Ganj. On that day, Accused brought one girl to their hotel at about 11 AM. He asked for a room in the hotel. PW6 asked him to give him his identity proof. The girl who was accompanying the Accused stated that she does not want any room and that the Accused has brought her there forcibly. Upon hearing this, Accused went away from their hotel and also took the said girl alongwith him. I tried to stop them but Accused fled away on his bike.
PW7 'P' is brother of Prosecutrix 'A'. He deposed that on 22.5.13 when he returned home after work in the evening, her sister 'A' and her mother Smt. 'PD' were crying. When he asked them the reason for crying, her mother took her outside the room and told her that one boy had committed rape upon her sister. He immediately called at 100 number. They were called at PS and he alongwith his mother and sister went to PS Pahar Ganj. Police recorded the statement of his sister at PS Pahar Ganj and also made enquiries from them.
PW8 'PD' mother of Prosecutrix deposed that her daughter was doing a job since about one month prior to 18.5.13. From that day, however, she started remaining 'gumsum' and also refused to go to her work.
On 22.5.13 she insisted her daughter 'A' to tell her the reason for remaining 'gumsum' and also not going for her job. She started crying and informed her that one boy namely Sonu had taken her to a hotel and committed rape upon her. She also started crying on hearing about this incident. In the meantime, her son 'P' also reached home after work and she narrated about the aforesaid facts to him. He informed the police and thereafter, they went to PS Pahar Ganj where her daughter gave her compliant.
She deposed that her daughter led the police to one room on third floor bearing Room No. 304 of one hotel whose name she does not remember now. Thereafter, her daughter was taken to LHMC for medical examination with one lady constable and she also went alongwith them. After the medical examination, the doctor handed over one pullanda to the IO. Police recorded her statement.
PW9 Ct. Arun Kumar deposited the sealed pullandas at FSL, Rohini vide RC No. 30/21.
PW10 Ct. Hemant Kumar took the computerized copy of FIR to LaBudha Guest House and handed over original rukka and copy of the FIR to the IO.
PW11 deposed that on 23.5.13, while he was posted as MHC(M) at PS Pahar Ganj, W. ASI Sushila deposited case property of this case i.e. three pullandas containing sample of the Prosecutrix with the seal of LHMC & Smt. SSK Hospital. IO also deposited four pullandas pertaining to Accused duly sealed with the seal of LHMC & SSK Hospital. IO also deposited two registers and day book of hotel "La Budha Guest House". IO also deposited one pullanda containing digital video recording duly sealed with the seal of 'SD'. IO also deposited motorcycle bearing No. DLSM 7900. PW11 made entry of the same in register No. 19 at serial No. 3232.
PW11 deposed that 28.5.13 he sent all the pullandas to FSL Rohini through Ct. Arun and also sent pullanda containing video recording to FSL, Rohini on 27.6.13 through Ct. Ashok. Copy of entry is Ex PW11/A. PW11 further deposed that he sent pullanda vide road certificate No. 30/21. Copy of same is Ex. PW11/B. Copy of acknowledgment is Ex. PW11/C. PW11 sent video recording to FSL through road certificate No. 5021. Copy of same is Ex. PW11/D. Acknowledgment in this regard is Ex. PW11/E. [OSR] PW12 Ct. Rambir deposed that on 23.05.2013, he was posted as Constable at PS Paharganj. On that day IO ASI Sushila and HC Arvind reached at a company at A27, PhaseII, Naraina Delhi for the search of Accused Sonu. There they came to know that Accused had left the said place for taking tea. They came out of the said premises, Prosecutrix along with her mother met them. She was also joined in the investigation. Accused Sonu was found sitting at a nearby tea shop and at the instance of Prosecutrix he was apprehended and on interrogation was arrested vide arrest memo already exhibited as Ex. PW2/B. Personal search of Accused was also conducted vide memo Ex. PW12/A. Accused gave his disclosure statement as Ex.PW12/B. Prosecutrix was relieved. The motorcycle of Accused bearing registration No. DL4SM7900 was parked outside the company of the Accused which was taken into possession and seized vide seizure memo Ex. PW12/C. Accused led them to La Budha Hotel and there he pointed out Room No. 304 at IIIrd floor, stated to be the place of incident vide pointing out memo Ex. PW12/D. Accused was taken to LHMC for medical examination. After examination, doctor gave him some sealed exhibits which he handed over to the IO and seized the same as Ex. PW12/E. They came back to PS. Exhibits were deposited in the malkhana.
PW12 W/Ct. Rekha deposed that on the intervening night of 2223.05.2013, she was posted at PS Paharganj and was on emergency duty. On 23.05.2013, she along with IO/ASI Sushila, Prosecutrix, her mother and SI Vinay [PW14] reached at Hotel La Budha. There Prosecutrix pointed out a room stated to be the place of incident. IO prepared the site plan. She took the Prosecutrix to LHMC for her medical examination. Her mother also accompanied them to the hospital. After her medical examination, doctor gave him some sealed envelopes with sample seal. She handed over the MLC and the exhibits to the IO, who seized the same vide seizure memo Ex. PW13/A. PW15 Vishal Gaurav, Nodal Officer from Bharti Airtel deposed that CDRs of mobile phone No. 9717340127 for the period w.e.f. 10.5.13 to 20.05.13 have been generated from the computer of their company and are not tampered with in any manner. The CDR is Ex. PW15/A [running into 04 pages].
PW15 also brought the CAF related to this mobile phone which is issued in the name of one Devender Malik. Copy of the same with ID proof is Ex. PW15/B. [OSR] The certificate under Section 65 B Indian Evidence Act is Ex. PW15/C. PW16 IO/SI Sushila deposed that on 23.5.13 she was posted as SI at PS Pahar Ganj. DD No. 32A was already assigned to SI Vinay [PW14]. She was called to the PS. Prosecutrix Aradhana, her brother Praveen and her mother met her in the PS. Prosecutrix gave her a written complaint on the basis of which she prepared rukka which is Ex. PW16/A and got registered the FIR. She along with Prosecutrix, her mother, L/Ct.Rekha and SI Vinay reached at hotel La Budha. Prosecutrix pointed out a room No.304, IIIrd floor of the hotel. She prepared the site plan of the said room at the instance of the Prosecutrix which is Ex. PW16/B. Ct. Hemant came at the said hotel and handed over to me the original rukka and copy of the FIR. She recorded the statement of Ct. Hemant and he was relieved. She sent Prosecutrix for her medical examination along with her mother and L/Ct.Rekha to LHMC Hospital.
PW16 IO/SI Sushila deposed that she made inquiries from Hotel Manager Alam. Alam produced one entry register and one day book of the La budha hotel. She converted the said register and book into cloth pulanda sealed with the seal of 'SD' and seized vide seizure memo already Ex. PW1/A. The copies of relevant entries of register and Day book are already Ex. PW1/C and Ex. PW1/D. Alam also produced one digital video recorder of CCTV, the same was converted into a cloth pulanda and sealed with the seal of 'SD' and seized vide seizure memo already Ex. PW1/B. She recorded the statement of the witnesses. They came back to PS. PW16 also recorded the statement of brother of Prosecutrix. Ct.Rekha also came back to the PS after getting Prosecutrix medically examined and produced some sealed exhibits and MLC. She seized the exhibits vide seizure memo already Ex. PW13/A. Exhibits were deposited in the malkhana. She recorded the statements of L/Ct. Rekha, Prosecutrix and her mother.
On the same day in the evening IO/SI Sushila along with HC Arvind and Ct. Ramveer left PS in search of Accused and they reached at place of work of Accused at A27, Industrial Area, PhaseII, Naraiyna. Prosecutrix along with her mother also met them there. Accused Sonu Desta was present at a tea shop near his working place. Accused was apprehended at the instance of the Prosecutrix and on interrogation was arrested vide arrest memo already Ex. PW2/B and his personal search was also conducted vide memo Ex. PW12/A . She recorded the disclosure statement of the Accused which is already Ex. PW12/B. Accused also got recovered the motorcycle bearing registration No. DL04SM7900 which was used in the commission of the offence from the parking outside his working place. The motorcycle was seized vide seizure memo already Ex. PW12/C. They again went to the hotel La Budha near Hari Mandir Gali and he pointed out the place of incident vide memo already Ex. PW12/D. Accused was sent to LHMC for his medical examination in the custody of HC Arvind and Ct.Ramveer. After the medical examination, Ct. Ramveer produced some sealed exhibits to her which she seized vide seizure memo already Ex. PW12/E. Exhibits were deposited in malkhana. She also collected the age proof of the Prosecutrix and as per her documents, she was aged about 20 years.
On 28.5.13 Ct. Arun deposited exhibits in FSL. She recorded the statement of Ct. Arun and MHC[M]. On 27.6.13 pullanda of DVR was also deposited in FSL through Ct. Ashok. She recorded the statement of Ct. Ashok and MHC[M].
PW16 deposed that on 02.07.13 she went to J. M. Hotel at Nabi Karim where Accused had taken the Prosecutrix and Manager of the said hotel had refused to give the room. She recorded the statement of Amit, Manager of said hotel. She collected the CDRs and placed on record. Since the pending of result of FSL, she completed the investigation, prepared the chargesheet and filed in court.
PW16 collected the result from FSL which is Ex. PW16/C [running into 02 sheets] and the pullanda of DVR was also received back from FSL, Rohini with the report that the same could not be examined there due to nonavailability of necessary facility. The report of FSL in this regard is Ex. PW16/D [running into 02 pages].
The exhibits of DVR have now been deposited in CFSL, CBI, Lodhi Complex, Delhi and the result is still pending. Arguments, Analysis and Findings:
It has been argued by Ld. APP that from the deposition of the Prosecutrix, it has been established on record beyond reasonable doubt that Accused Sonu Desta committed rape upon her at LaBudha Guest House on 18.05.13. He further submitted that Accused has been correctly identified by Prosecutrix PW2 as well as by Manager of the said hotel i.e. PW1 during trial. Further, MLC of the Prosecutrix Ex. PW3/A and deposition of examining Doctor i.e. PW3 Dr. Apeksha also corroborates the testimony of Prosecutrix.
Ld. APP also submits that besides PW6 Amit Kumar, Manager of Hotel J. M. Deluxe where Accused firstly took Prosecutrix with her also correctly identified Accused and deposed that he had brought one girl at their hotel and asked for the room. Ld. APP further pointed out that as per PW6 girl who was accompanying Accused stated that she does not want any room and that the Accused has brought her there forcibly. Thereafter, Accused went to away from that hotel and also took the said girl alongwith him.
Ld. APP hence, argued that Accused took Prosecutrix alongwith him forcibly to one hotel and thereafter to second hotel i.e. La Budha Guest House where he committed rape upon her. It was thus submitted that Accused be convicted for offence under Section 376 IPC in view of the above evidence on record.
On the other hand, Ld. Defence Counsel strongly opposed the case of the Prosecution and submitted that Prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of Accused beyond reasonable doubt. He argued that conduct of the Prosecutrix belies her claim that she was raped by Accused on 18..5.13. It was submitted that Accused vehemently denied the fact that any sexual relations were ever established between him and the Prosecutrix. However, even if any such relations were established, they were consensual in nature and the Prosecutrix was never raped by the Accused, as alleged. It was thus prayed that Accused be acquitted in view of the material on record.
I have considered the rival submissions made before me in the light of evidence on record.
At the outset, it is necessary to observe that it is well settled law that the Prosecutrix in a rape case is not to be treated as an accomplice and that her statement, if found credible, must be accepted and is not required to be corroborated. However, at the same time, it is equally well settled law that the evidence of the Prosecutrix must be examined as that of an injured witness whose presence at the spot is probable but it can never be presumed that her statement should, without exception, be taken as a gospel truth. In this regard, reference may be made to the observations of Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Rajoo & Ors. vs. State of M.P. AIR 2009 SC 858.
Same views were reiterated by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in its recent pronouncement titled as Mumtaz vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi), 2013 (2) JCC 1308 .
In 2011, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Krishan Kumar Malik vs. State of Haryana, (2011) 7 SCC 130 also laid down that 'Solitary evidence of Prosecutrix is sufficient to prove charge of rape, provided the same inspires confidence and appears to be absolutely trustworthy, unblemished and should be of sterling quality'.
The testimony of Prosecutrix PW2 must now be analyzed in the light of the aforesaid observations of Hon'ble Superior Courts.
In the present case, Prosecutrix PW2 'A' deposed that Accused forcibly established physical relations with her on 18.5.13. However, a careful reading of her deposition clearly reveals that deposition of PW2 is not worthy of reliance.
Pertinently, it is her own testimony that Accused was making telephonic calls to her since 11.05.13 stating that he wants to marry her. She further deposed that she talked to him in the evening of 12.05.13 and he asked her to meet him near office at Naraina. She met him near her office and thereafter he dropped her at Kirti Nagar. PW2 further deposed that Accused used to come to her bus stand after her office hours and also revealed his name as Sonu.
In the morning of 18.05.13 Accused again called her though she refused initially but on his persistent requests, she met him at Kirti Nagar Metro Station. Accused offered to drop her at her office on his motorcycle but instead of taking her to her office, he took her to Rajouri Garden stating that he wants to get some licence work done first. Thereafter, despite giving her assurance that he will he will drop her at the office, Accused took her to one hotel at Pahar Ganj. She deposed that when Manager asked her for identification proof, she told him that Accused had brought her there forcibly and said Manager refused to give room to her.
Upon analyzing the aforesaid testimony of the Prosecutrix, it is apparent that she talked to him on phone despite knowing the fact that Accused had clearly told her in the first telephonic conversation itself on 11.05.13 that he wants to marry her. It is her own statement that she refused his said proposal of marriage. In view of the same, it is difficult to believe as to why she continued to remain in touch with him telephonically and even met him on 12.05.13 and then accompanied him on his motorcycle, when he dropped her at Kirti Nagar.
PW2 'A' also deposed that Accused used to come at her bus stand after her office hours. Thus, apparently, she continued to talk to Accused and meet him despite knowing that he was interested in marrying her and despite her refusal for the same. It has also come on record in testimony of PW2 that she did not disclose about the Accused to her family members till 22.05.13. In other words, she kept her conversations and meetings with Accused a secret from her family.
What is also surprising is as to why after the Accused took her forcibly to one hotel i.e. J. M. Deluxe, she accompanied the Accused to the second hotel i.e. LaBudha Guest House on the same day. Though PW6 Manager of hotel J. M. Deluxe has deposed that the girl accompanying the Accused had told him that he had brought her there forcibly, still there is no reason as to why she again accompanied him on his motorcycle to LaBudha Guest House.
It is also apparent that on going through the crossexamination of PW2 'A' that even after leaving first hotel, she made no attempt to make a call at 100 number or to make any complaint to any other person despite the fact that she was admittedly carrying her mobile phone with her all the time. Instead she went to LaBudha Guest House with Accused.
Further, as per PW1 Manager of LaBudha Guest House, Accused did not make entry in the hotel register stating that he will make an entry after seeing the room. Thereafter, he alongwith Prosecutrix went to Room No. 304 and they returned from the said room after about 45 minutes or one hour and left the hotel after paying Rs. 600/. PW1, Manager of LaBudha Guest House made the entries in day book instead of register as day to day transaction used to be maintained in the day book.
It is also apparent on going through the deposition of PW2 'A' that she made no attempt to escape from Room No. 304 of LaBudha Guest House when Accused removed her clothes and also removed his clothes. Though she deposed that she cried and tried to resist the Accused but it is not her claim that she raised an alarm or caused any injuries upon person of Accused in her 'so called' attempt to resist his advances. Rather, PW2 deposed before the court that Accused used condom when he established sexual relations with her. To my mind, the very fact that Accused used a condom while establishing sexual relations with the Prosecutrix, is sufficient to indicate that sexual relations between them were consensual in nature.
It is also not out of place to mention from the testimony of Prosecutrix PW2 'A' and PW1 Alam, it has been brought out on record that Prosecutrix reached the Registration Authority at Rajouri Garden with Accused at about 10 AM. Apparently, she remained with him till he got his work done at the registration authority.
Noticeably, in his statement under Section 313 CrPC, in response to Question No. 7, Accused has also stated that she accompanied him voluntarily to Rajouri Garden and waited for two hours while he got RC of his vehicle transferred in his name.
PW1 in his crossexamination has also deposed that Accused came to their hotel alongwith Prosecutrix at about 11 AM. In his examination in chief, he has deposed that they remained in Room No. 304 for 45 minutes or one hour.
Thus, apparently, the Prosecutrix remained with Accused since morning till atleast 1212.30 PM and throughout this period, she made no attempt to escape or to raise any hue and cry or to seek any help from any public person or from the police despite the fact that she was having mobile phone with her. The flimsy explanation given by the Prosecutrix that she did not make any call from her mobile phone as Accused did not allow her to do so when they were in LaBudha Guest House is not believable.
It is also pertinent to note that Prosecutrix is aged about 20 years. She also deposed that she was pursuing her graduation. It is also a matter of record that she is working as Receptionist in an office at PhaseII, Naraina. She also deposed in her crossexamination that she has been living in Delhi for last 15 years and used to go to her office alone. Thus, the Prosecutrix, by no stretch of imagination can be said to be a naive girl who could have been forcibly taken by the Accused from one hotel to the other.
In the light of the aforesaid, I am of the view that the entire claim of the Prosecutrix in these circumstances, is not believable and she cannot be treated as a trustworthy witness. Consequently, I find myself unable to agree with the submissions of Ld. APP that case of Prosecution has been established beyond reasonable doubt. Rather, from the deposition of Prosecutrix and the other evidence on record, as discussed herein above, I find that Prosecution has been failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Accused cannot be convicted on the basis of such unreliable testimony of the Prosecutrix and is certainly entitled to be acquitted in these circumstances. Accused is accordingly acquitted. He be released forthwith, if not wanted in any other case.
File be consigned to Record Room.
Announced in the Open Court on 03.05.2014 (Kaveri Baweja) Additional Sessions Judge Special FTC2 (Central) Tis Hazari Courts: Delhi.
State Vs. Sonu Desta
FIR No. 138/13
PS : Pahar Ganj
SC No. : 81/13
03.05.2014
Present : Sh. Mohd. IqrarLd. APP for the State.
Accused produced in J/c.
Vide separate judgment announced in open court today, Accused is acquitted for offence under Section 376 IPC.
He be released forthwith, if not wanted in any other case. At this stage, accused is directed to furnish bail bond to the tune of Rs. 10,000/ with one surety in the like amount in terms of Section 437A CrPC.
Bail bond furnished and accepted.
File be consigned to Record Room.
(Kaveri Baweja) Additional Sessions JudgeSFTC (Central) Tis Hazari Courts: Delhi.