IMPORTANT POINT
The duty of the appellate court to reappreciate the evidence in cases of acquittal and the need for reliable and trustworthy testimony, corroborated with medical evidence and testimony of other witnesses.

JUDGMENT (Oral)

1. The present criminal leave petition under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short `Cr.P.C') has been filed by the appellant-State seeking leave to appeal against the impugned judgment dated 18.12.2019 vide which the respondents have been acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 363/366/342/506/34 of Indian Penal Code (in short `IPC'), 1860 and Section 5(g) & 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (in short `POCSO') in FIR No. 115/2013, registered at police station Aman Vihar, Delhi.

2. The factual position, on which the prosecution version is found, is that on 19.03.2013 around 3:00-4:00 P.M, the prosecutrix had gone to a medical store to bring medicine for her elder sister, who was having a severe headache, situated in the backside gali of her house. On her way to the store, Rehan caught hold of her and forcibly took her to a nearby room. Rehan used to work at the TV/refrigerator shop in the same gali. Despite her raising an alarm, no one came to her rescue since there was nobody in the gali at that time. In the room, Gaurav/respondent no.1 was also present there. Rehan pushed her upon Gaurav and both of them tied her hands, mouth and feet with a cloth. Thereafter, they removed her clothes and turn by turn forcibly committed sexual assault (gandi harkat kari thi) upon her against her wishes turn by turn.

3. Thereafter, Rehan called two more persons namely, respondent No.2- Rahul and Dharambir, to the said room. They also forcibly committed sexual assault upon her against her will in the presence of Rehan and Gaurav. Thereafter, Rehan untied her hands, mouth and feet and threatened her not to disclose this incident to anyone, otherwise they would kill her father. They all left the room after bolting it from outside. After half an hour, another person namely Monu opened the room door, the proseuctrix pushed him aside and ran away from there. Due to fear and threat to her father's life, she did not disclose about this incident to anyone. On the next day i.e. 20.03.2013, prosecutrix narrated the entire incident to her neighbour Smt. Neelam (PW- 12), whom she treated as a mother after her mother's death in 2009 and also to her father, who called the police PCR.

4. On the complaint of the prosecutrix, FIR No. 115/2013 was registered at police station Aman Vihar, Delhi for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(G)/363/342/506/34 IPC at police station Aman Vihar, Delhi. During investigation of the case, statement of prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate.

5. After completion of the investigation, on 20.03.2013 charge-sheet for the offences punishable under Sections 376(D)/366(A)/109/363/342/ 506/201/34 of IPC and Sections 4/6/8 of POCSO Act, 2012, was filed against Gaurav, Rehan (JCL), Monu and Dharambir.

6. Vide order dated 26.10.2013 declared accused Gaurav and Rahul as Proclaimed Offender (PO) by the court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate. However, on 17.03.2016, accused Gaurav was arrested and on 02.08.2016 and thereafter, accused Rahul was also arrested. Supplementary charge-sheet was filed against both these accused persons, who were earlier declared PO and Charge under Sections 363/366/342/506/34/376(D) IPC and 15(g)/6 of POCSO Act was framed against all the accused persons, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

7. The prosecution examined 32 witnesses in support of its case, which included deposition of prosecutrix (PW-9); HC Sukhbir (PW-1) who had received the information in respect of the complaint in question; Dr. Gurdeep Singh (PW-2) who had medically examined the prosecutrix on 20.03.2013; Dr. Bina (CMO) (PW-5) at SGM Hospital, who had medically examined accused Dharmabir on 23.03.2013; Dr. Brijesh Singh, CMO SGM Hospital (PW-6) who had medically examined accused Rehan; Rajesh Kumar (PW-7) who had brought the birth certificate of prosecutrix; Shri Bhupinder Singh (PW-10), lear