Thu. Sep 24th, 2020

Rajesh vs State on 5 October, 2015

2 min read

1. Aggrieved by a judgment dated 04.08.2011 of learned Addl.

Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.44/10 arising out of FIR No.87/10 PS

Dabri by which the appellant – Rajesh was convicted for committing

offences under Sections 376/506 IPC, he has preferred the instant appeal

to challenge its legality and propriety. By an order dated 18.08.2011, the

appellant was awarded RI for ten years with fine `10,000/- under Section

376 IPC and RI for two years with fine `5,000/- under Section 506 IPC.

The substantive sentences were to operate concurrently.

Crl.A.No.233/2013 Page 1 of 11
2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case as reflected in the charge-

sheet was that before registration of the FIR, the appellant sexually

assaulted and abused the prosecutrix ‘X’ (assumed name) at House

No.RZ-372, Gali No.14A, Durga Park, Sagar Pur, New Delhi, for about

six months and criminally intimidated her. The police machinery came

into motion when information was conveyed by Duty Constable Manjeet

Singh at DDU Hospital about admission of a girl ‘X’ aged around

seventeen years in an injured condition by her mother. Daily Diary (DD)

No.33A (Ex.PW-13/A) came into existence at 02.30 p.m. The

investigation was assigned to SI Anil Kumar who with Constable Rakesh

went to DDU Hospital and found ‘X’ admitted there. He moved an

application (Ex.PW-7/A) to seek permission from the doctor to interrogate

‘X’. ‘X’ revealed that she was being continuously raped by her step-father

for the last five or six months. SI Anil Kumar apprised the SHO

concerned on telephone and the investigation was taken over by W/SI

Asha (PW-14). After recording X’s statement (Ex.PW-9/A), she lodged

First Information Report. During investigation, ‘X’ recorded her statement

under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The accused was arrested and taken for medical

examination. Statements of the witnesses conversant with the facts were

recorded. Upon completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was filed in
Crl.A.No.233/2013 Page 2 of 11
the Court against the appellant. The prosecution examined sixteen

witnesses to substantiate its case. In 313 Cr.P.C. statement the appellant

pleaded false implication without producing any witness in defence. The

trial resulted in conviction for the offences as aforesaid. Being aggrieved

and dissatisfied, the instant appeal has been filed by him.

Source: Indian Kanoon

Leave a Reply