Criminal Case No. 64/13
Delhi District Court
BENCH: Hon’ble SH. MAHESH CHANDER GUPTA J.
DATE OF JUDGEMENT: 1st August 2015
RELEVANT ACTS/SECTIONS:
- Section 376(2)(f) IPC (commits rape on a woman when she is under twelve years of age)
- Section 363 IPC (Punishment for kidnapping)
- Section 365 IPC (Kidnapping or abducting with intent secretly and wrongfully to confine person)
- Section 34 IPC (Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention)
- Section 506 IPC (Punishment for criminal intimidation)
- Section 366 IPC (Kidnapping, abducting or inducing woman to compel her marriage, etc.)
- Section 109 IPC (Punishment of abetment if the act abetted is committed in consequence and where no express provision is made for its punishment.)
BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE
On 13/05/2011, Umesh got lodged the missing report of her daughter that On 09/05/2011 at 8:00 she had gone outside the house for playing and not returned so far and he had been searching her till now by his means. Police record his statement, based on the statement police register FIR, u/s 363 IPC appeared to have been committed and started the investigation. They sent her photo to NCRB and Akashvani and searched for her at the Bus Stand, Railway Station, red light area and made inquiries from the suspected persons but no clue could be found. On 25/05/2011, SI Neeraj Kumar recovered prosecutrix from the custody of Ram Udagar and his wife Smt. Sukhia. Police took her to SRHC Hospital, where her medical examination got conducted. After medical examination police record the statement of prosecutrix u/s 164 CrPc, that she knows accused Ram Udagar and Sukhia as they were residing near our house. She used to go to their house for playing. She also knows the accused Tej Narain as he used to come at the house of Sukhia Aunty. She said Ram Udagar had committed rape upon her. Sukhia sent her to the village in Bihar with accused Tej Narain and Tej Narain had committed rape with her in the village. One day Accused Sukhia and Ram Udagar came to the village then Accused Ram Udagar took her in the field and he also committed rape upon her and threatened her not to disclose this fact to anybody. When she narrated all these facts to Sukhia, she also threatened her not to disclose this fact to anybody. .Police found sufficient evidence against Smt. Sukhia and Ram Udagar they were arrested in the case. Both were medically examined at SRHC Hospital. The sealed exhibits handed over by the Doctor after the medical examination of accused Ram Udagar were taken into Police possession. During the investigation, police arrested Tej Narain and filed challan u/s 363/365/ 376(2) (F)/ 34 IPC.
FORENSIC REPORT
All The exhibits found were examined in FSL Rohini, Delhi by Dr. Manisha Upadhyaya, Senior Scientific Officer (Biology) FSL and it was noticed that semen was detected on prosecutrix shirt, dupatta and undergarment of accused Ram Udagar. Blood and semen could not be detected on pubic hair of accused Tej Narain and it is noticed that alleged incident is from 09/05/2011 to 25/05/2011 and Tej Narain was arrested on 29/08/2011 during this period it cannot be ruled out that accused Tej Narain must have taken bath several times and must have answered the call of nature several times and must have urinated several times and this not being a case of recent sexual intercourse activity and this is the reason it appears that blood and semen could not be detected on pubic hair of accused Tej Narain.
JUDGEMENT
Ram Udagar and Smt. Sukhiya both were convicted for the offence punishable u/s 363/365/34 IPC and Ram Udagar, Smt. Sukhiya and Tej Narain convicted for an offence punishable u/s 366 r/w u/s 109 IPC. Tej Narain also convicted for the offence punishable u/s 376 (2)(f). Ram Udagar and Smt. Sukhiya also convicted for the offence punishable u/s 506 IPC.