Sanjay Kumar vs State (Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi) on 6 November, 2015

1. Challenge in this appeal is to a judgment dated 12.09.2006 of

learned Addl. Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.181/2006 arising out of

FIR No.191/03 by which the appellant – Sanjay Kumar was convicted for

committing offences punishable under Sections 376/448 IPC. By an order

dated 21.09.2006, he was sentenced to undergo RI for seven years with

fine `1,000/- under Section 376 IPC and RI for six months with fine `500

under Section 448 IPC. Both the sentences were to operate concurrently.

Crl.A.No.914/2006 Page 1 of 8
2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case as projected in the

charge-sheet was that on 25.02.2003 at 02.00 pm after committing house

trespass at D4/363, Sultanpuri, the appellant committed rape upon the

prosecutrix ‘X’ (assumed name) aged around 27 years. She was criminally

intimidated and robbed of her jewellery articles and cash `9,000/-. Police

machinery came into motion on receiving information about the incident

at 02.55 pm on 25.02.2003 and DD No.58B (Ex.PW-7/A) came into

existence at PS Sultanpuri. The investigation was assigned to ASI Kaptan

Singh who with Const.Parminder went to the spot. After recording

victim’s statement (PW-8/A), he lodged First Information Report. The

prosecutrix was medically examined; she recorded her 164 Cr.P.C.

statement. The accused was arrested and taken for medical examination.

Statements of the witnesses conversant with the facts were recorded.

Exhibits collected during investigation were sent for examination to

Forensic Science Laboratory. Upon completion of investigation, a charge-

sheet was filed against the appellant for offences under Sections

323/376/380/506/397/452 IPC. By an order dated 07.02.2004, the

appellant was charged for committing offences under Sections

448/377/376/323/380/506 part-II IPC to which he pleaded not guilty and

claimed trial. To establish its case, prosecution examined fifteen
Crl.A.No.914/2006 Page 2 of 8
witnesses. In 313 Cr.P.C. statement, the appellant pleaded false

implication and denied complicity in the crime. He did not produce any

evidence in defence. On appreciation of the evidence and after

considering the rival contentions of the parties, the Trial Court, by the

impugned judgment held the appellant guilty for committing offence

under Sections 376/448 IPC. It is apt to note that the appellant was

acquitted of the charges under Sections 380/506 part-II/ 377 IPC. State did

not challenge the said acquittal.

Source: Indian Kanoon

Leave a Reply