SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J.

1. Present leave to appeal petition has been filed by the State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment dated 10.12.2014 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge–FTC–2 (Central), Tis Hazari Court, Delhi in Sessions Case No. 05/2013, whereby the respondent was acquitted of the charges framed under Sections 376 (2) (g)/342 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The brief facts of this case, as noticed by the learned Trial Court are as under :

“1. The case in hand has been registered on the basis of statement dated 18.08.2011 made by the Prosecutrix ‘p’ (name withheld in order to protect her identity) wherein she has stated that she is a permanent resident of Balampur District, Sant Kabir Nagar, UP and had studied up to Class VII. She also stated that her family comprises of her mother and brother Mithilesh, who used to work a Mason at Delhi for the last 4-5 years. She further stated in her complaint that about one year back her brother had brought her to Delhi and got her employed at the residence of accused Laxman Prasad Rai at E-367-B, Part-I, Delhi at a monthly salary of Rs. 3,000/-. The complainant used to do the work of maid at the house of the accused. The prosecutrix further stated in her complaint that the accused had two wives namely Reena Rai and Ruchi Jha, who had a quarrel about one month ago and accused shifted Ruchi Jha at House No.779, Vaishali, Sector-3, Ghaziabad, UP and had also deployed the Prosecutrix along with her and the Prosecutrix started living there and used to worked at a maid.

2. Prosecutrix ‘P’ further alleged in her complaint that on 17.08.2011, the accused took her from Vaishali in his car to his another house at Sarai Rohilla and asked her to clean that house as the same was lying closed for a long period of time. The accused also picked up two persons from Vaishali in his car by introducing them as his friends and told her that they are also going to Sarai Rohilla.

3. She further stated that after reaching at H. No. 19/20/1, West Moti Bagh, Sarai Rohilla at about 10 PM, the lock of the ground floor of the said premises was opened and she cleaned the said floor. After some time accused Laxman Prasad Rai and his friends came inside the house and asked her to bring water. Prosecutrix brought the water and also drank one glass of water out of it. After consuming the same, she felt giddy and that accused Laxman Prasad Rai caught hold of her and asked her to take off her clothes. Out of fear and under the state of intoxication, Prosecutrix took off all her clothes. Thereafter, accused Laxman Prasad Rai committed rape upon her against her wishes. Complainant further alleged in her complaint that thereafter the other two friends of the accused had also committed rape upon her one by one and she lost her consciousness.

4. Prosecutrix ‘p’ further stated in her complaint that on 18.08.2011 at about 9 AM, accused Laxman Prasad Rai asked her to wear her clothes and threatened her not to disclose this incident to anyone otherwise she would be killed. She was then taken by the accused and one of his friend in the car and after leaving her at Shastri Nagar Metro Station they left from there. Complainant also stated in her complaint that she can identify those other two friends if shown to her.

5. Prosecutrix was got medically examined vide MLC No. 5696/11 dated 18.08.2011. During the course of investigation, statement of Prosecutrix was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and another statement under Section 164 Cr.PC was recorded before the learned MM. Charge sheet further reveals that during the course of investigation, the Prosecutrix initially pointed out the wrong place as scene of crime i.e. 19/20, West Moti Bagh, Sarai Rohilla, Delhi, but later she correctly pointed out the scene of crime i.e. 19/20/1, West Moti Bagh, Sarai Rohilla, Delhi. The same was inspected by the Crime Team and site