Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Neena Bansal Krishna, JJ.
State NCT of Delhi - Appellant
Versus
Raj Karan @ Babloo & Anr. - Respondents
CRL.L.P. 199 of 2021
Decided On : 22-09-2023
Leave to Appeal - Criminal Procedure - CrPC 378(3) - IPC 376(2)(g), 377, 506, 34 - The court discussed the identification of the accused, the failure of the prosecutrix to identify them during the investigation, and the lack of corroborative medical evidence. The court concluded that the identity of the accused as perpetrators of the crime was not established beyond reasonable doubt, leading to their acquittal.
Fact of the Case:
The prosecutrix alleged that she was raped and assaulted by two individuals while returning home from work. The accused were charged under Sections 376(2)(g), 377, 506, 34 of the IPC.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecutrix's identification of the accused in court was not beyond a shadow of doubt, and the corroborative medical evidence did not connect the accused to the crime. The court extended the benefit of doubt to the accused and acquitted them.
Issues: The key issue was the identification of the accused and the lack of corroborative medical evidence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the prosecution failed to establish the identity of the accused as perpetrators of the crime beyond reasonable doubt, leading to their acquittal.
Final Decision: The Leave to Appeal was dismissed, and the accused were acquitted.
JUDGMENT (Oral)
1. The State has filed the present petition seeking Leave to Appeal under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, "CrPC") against the impugned Judgment dated 04.12.2019 vide which the respondents have been acquitted for the charges under Sections 376(2)(g)/377/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, "IPC").
2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 01.09.2010 the prosecutrix "K" made a complaint to Police Station Punjabi Bagh stating that she was a married woman having four children. She was working as a cook in a Banquet hall in Janakpuri. On 30.08.2010 she received a call from Manager of Banquet Hall asking her to report as there was a party. Initially, she expressed her inability as she was not feeling well but at the insistence of Manager, she agreed and left her house at about 10 PM. She took a bus from Madipur and deboarded at Peeraghari Chowk. Since she was not feeling well, she made a call to the Manager who allowed her to go back to house. She took a rickshaw and deboarded near Khatir Restaurant. It was late night. As she was walking back to home on foot and reached near temple, she notice two boys roaming there on motorcycle and on seeing her they whispered that `Dekho Jugaad Jaa Raha Hai'. She ignored and kept on walking, but suddenly the boy sitting on the pillion seat of motorcycle caught hold her from her hairs and slapped her, making her fall to the ground. Then the boy held her from her arm and took her to the back street of Khatir Restaurant. The boy, who was driving the motorcycle threatened her not to raise alarm. The boy with short height raped her and the other boy put his penis into her mouth due to which she vomited. Thereafter, both of them asked her to come to them whenever told by them. One of them told her that his name was "Karan" and he was a bad character of the area to whom no harm can be caused even by the police. They offered her to drop to her home and took her mobile. However, on getting an opportunity she hid herself under a van and the boys went away on not being able to find her. Thereafter, she returned back to her house. On 31.08.2010, when her husband returned home, she told him about the entire incident. She then made a complaint to the Police Station on which the FIR under Sections 376(G)/377/506 IPC was registered at PS Punjabi Bagh.
3. The investigation was taken up by the police. The statement of the prosecutrix under Section 164 CrPC (Ex.PW-1/C) was recorded on 15.06.2015 by the learned MM.
4. The accused Raj Karan @ Babloo was apprehended alongwith stolen motorcycle on 18.10.2010 by ASI Sensar Pal in FIR No. 77/2010 under Section 379 IPC at PS Punjabi Bagh. He made a disclosure statement Ex. PW-16/A in the said case about the commission of offence in this case. He was formally arrested on the intervening night of 18-19.10.2010.
5. Samples were taken and sent to FSL for matching and for an expert opinion. Respondent No.1 Raj Karan @ Babloo admitted his guilt in his disclosure statement and also disclosed the name of his other friend as Jitender @ Golu. Raj Karan @ Babloo refused to get his TIP conducted on 23.10.2010 but he again moved an application for getting his TIP conducted which was conducted on 18.12.2010 vide proceedings Ex.PW-11/C. On completion of investigation, charge-sheet under Section 376G/377/506 IPC was filed before the learned MM and the charges under Sections 376(2)(g)/377/506/34 IPC were framed against the accused Raj Karan @ Babloo on 14.05.2011 to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
6. The efforts were made to trace the other accused Jitender @ Golu but he could not be traced and ultimately proceedings under Section 82 CrPC were initiated against him. Thereafter the accused Jitender @ Golu was arrested in FIR No. 39/2011 dated 06.11.2011 under Section 25/54 of the Arms Act at PS Sultanpuri wherein he made a disclosure statement about this case. He was formally arrested in this case. The judicial
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to establish the identity of the accused as perpetrators of the crime beyond reasonable doubt.
The central legal point established is the requirement for the prosecution to prove the charges against the accused beyond reasonable doubt, including reliable identification and corroborating eviden....
The importance of victim testimony, identification of accused, and the relevance of Test Identification Parade in criminal cases.
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and failure to identify the accused or utilize expert assistance in interpreting gestures of a disabled victim creates reasonable doubt.
The prosecution must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and failure to identify the accused fatally undermines the case.
The importance of conducting a test identification parade and the need for corroborating evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
