Consistency of testimonies and established evidence of the offense outweighed the claim of intoxication as a defense.

JUDGMENT :

1. The petitioner has filed the present revision petition impugning a judgment dated 02.09.2020 (hereinafter ‘the impugned judgment’), whereby the petitioner’s appeal against a judgment dated 26.07.2019 convicting him for an offence punishable under Section 354/451 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter ‘IPC’) and an order dated 27.08.2019 sentencing him for the said offences, was dismissed.

2. The learned Trial Court found merit in the prosecution’s case that, at about 01:00 p.m. on 04.08.2014, the petitioner had entered into the house of the complainant. She was resting at that time. He had caught hold of her left hand and given a blow on her chest with the intention to outrage her modesty. In addition, he had allegedly threatened her.

3. The complainant was examined as PW2. She stated that she was working as a maid in the nearby houses. She testified that on 04.08.2014, at about 01:00 p.m. or 01:30 p.m., she returned back home after completing her work and was lying on her cot. She stated that the petitioner, who lived near her house, entered the house and started physically abusing her. She alleged that he delivered a blow on her chest and had also threatened that he would kill her with a knife. She raised an alarm and on hearing the same, her nephew, Kartik, came and apprehended him. He called the police. The PCR came and took him to the police station. She also stated that she along with her nephew, Kartik, went to the police station. Her statement (Ex.PW2/A) was recorded by the police. Subsequently, her statement under Section 164 of the Cr.PC (Ex.PW2/D) was recorded. In her statement, she stated that she had returned to her home at about 01:30 p.m. on 04.08.2014. She had entered the house and had lied down on a cot (charpai). A little while later, a boy came and caught hold of her hand and he also gave a blow on her chest (meri chhati par hath mara). She stated that she started screaming and on hearing the same, her nephew came and took the boy, whose name was Bhopali, outside. She stated that thereafter, they called the police. She also alleged that he had threatened her and she was feeling scared.

4. HC Rakesh Kumar was examined as PW6. He testified that on 04.08.2014, he was posted as a Head Constable at PS Vasant Kunj (North). He stated that at about 01:35 p.m., he received DD No.51B regarding molestation at the given address. He stated that he, along with Ct. Askaran went to the spot where they met the complainant, her nephew and some neighbours. They had apprehended the accused Sandeep @ Bhopali. He testified that he recorded the statement of the complainant (Ex.PW2/A) in presence of Ct. Rakhi. He prepared a rukka (Ex.PW6/A) which was handed over to Ct. Askaran for registration of the FIR.

5. Ct. Askaran was examined as PW4. His testimony is consistent with that of HC Rakesh (PW6). He testified that the IO had handed over the rukka to him and he had taken the same to the police station and got the FIR registered. He testified that after getting the FIR registered, he came back to the spot and handed over the original rukka and a copy of the complaint to the IO (HC Rakesh).

6. Ct. Rakhi was examined as PW5. She stated that on 04.08.2014, at about 01:30 p.m., a call had been received by the PCR Cell about someone misbehaving with a woman. Since the call related to an offence committed against a woman, she was sent to the spot. She testified that she went to the spot and met the IO (HC Rakesh Kumar). He recorded the statement/complaint of the complainant. She stated that she read over the statement to the complainant and had also signed the same.

7. The nephew of the complainant, Kartik Barman, was examined as PW3. He testified that he was working as a housekeeper and on 04.08.2014, at about 01:00 p.m. – 01:30 p.m., he was resting at his home. He heard a hue and cry from outside and immediately rushed outside. He saw the accused Bhopali running out of the house of his paternal aunt (the complainant). He sta