SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Mukta Gupta, Anish Dayal, JJ.
Vinod Kumar - Appellant
Versus
State - Respondent
Crl.A. 517 of 2019, Crl.A. 556 of 2019 and Crl.A. 562 of 2019 & Crl. M.A. 8933 of 2019
Decided On : 03-11-2022




Conviction upheld based on reliable testimony and corroborating DNA evidence, with the court emphasizing the necessity of addressing both merits of conviction and appropriateness of sentencing in appeals.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 366 and 376 - Conviction of Hanuman Mishra for offences under Sections 366 and 376 IPC, imprisonment for life; Parveen Kumar and Vinod Kumar convicted for offences under Section 366 IPC read with Section 34 and Section 376(2)(g) IPC; Appeals against conviction and sentence; Court found the prosecutrix's testimony reliable and corroborated by DNA evidence; Court stated the legality of sentencing to be determined based on the severity of the crimes committed; Dismissed appeals with directions for remission application. (Paras 1, 24, 28)

Facts of the case:
The prosecutrix was lured to the house of Hanuman Mishra under false pretenses and subsequently raped. After escaping, she was again attacked by two other accused in a car. The case was built on her testimony and corroborated by DNA analysis. (Paras 1, 2, 18, 21)

Findings of Court:
The court upheld the conviction based on reliable testimony and DNA evidence, emphasizing that the appellants committed rape and should be held accountable without leniencies. (Paras 22, 27)

Issues: The court addressed the reliability of the prosecutrix's testimony, the appropriateness of the convictions given the evidence, and the appeal for leniency in sentence. (Paras 7, 28)

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that appeals against convictions must focus on the merits of the case, and simply accepting a concession on sentencing was not sufficient; the systematic assessment of both conviction and sentence is needed to uphold justice. (Paras 7, 15-18)

Result: Appeals dismissed.

JUDGMENT

Mukta Gupta, J. By the present appeals the appellants challenge the impugned judgment dated 15th December, 2018 whereby appellant Hanuman Mishra was convicted for offences punishable under Section 366 and 376 IPC whereas appellants Parveen Kumar and Vinod Kumar were convicted for offences punishable under Section 366 IPC read with 34 IPC and Section 376(2)(g) IPC. Vide the order on sentence dated 15th December, 2018 appellant Hanuman Mishra was awarded imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs.1 lakh for offence punishable under Section 376 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years and a fine of Rs.50,000/- in default whereof to undergo six months simple imprisonment for offence punishable under Section 376 IPC. Appellants Parveen Kumar and Vinod Kumar were awarded imprisonment for life for offence punishable under Section 376(2)(g) IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.1 lakh each and rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years and a fine of Rs.50,000/- in default whereof to undergo six months simple imprisonment for offence punishable under Section 366 read with 34 IPC.

2. Case of the prosecution is based on the testimony of PW-1 the prosecutrix who lodged the FIR exhibited vide Ex.PW-1/A on 9th April, 2011 at 10.15 AM stating that she was residing in Uttar Pradesh. Her family had a house in Faridabad and she was studying in class 10th. Two months prior her father suffered an injury, since when she and her mother joined her father at Faridabad. She has an elder brother who got married 4-5 years ago to the daughter of Hanuman Mishra. Hanuman Mishra was presently residing at Rangpuri village in a rented accommodation and her brother's wife i.e. daughter of Hanuman Mishra was presently residing at the village. On 7th April, 2011 Hanuman Mishra and his wife Lalita came to their house at Faridabad. On 8th April, 2011 when Hanuman Mishra was going back, he said to her father that his company was giving gifts to the girls and the victim should accompany her as his daughter so that he could get a gift for her from his company. Since Lalita, the wife of Hanuman was unwell, she continued to stay with the victim's parents. After reaching Rangpuri, the victim came to know that Hanuman Mishra brought her on a false pretext to his house. He got her a suit and told her that if there is a phone call, she should tell that she has got the gift. She asked Hanuman Mishra to drop her at her residence, on which he stated that he was tired and will drop her next day. After dinner she fell asleep, when Hanuman Mishra came to her and started sexually harassing her. He put perfume on her and touched her. He took off her clothes and committed rape on her. When she protested, Hanuman Mishra stated that she should not tell these facts to anybody. At night she left the house secretly, as she was scared. While she was walking, she saw an Indica CAR. The boy who was driving the Indica CAR told his name as Bijender, S/o of Jagbir Singh, R/o village Barona, Thana Kharkoda, District Sonipath, Haryana. When he offered to help her, she got into his Indica car when two other boys also sat in the said car. Thereafter, driver Bijender started taking the car towards jungle at Dwarka and stopped over there. When she asked the driver, about the reason to stop the car, he started evading the answer. The two boys sitting at the back started misbehaving with her and when she objected, they assaulted her. One of the two boys got down and then the other boy forcibly raped her on the rear seat of the car. Thereafter, the other boy came and forcibly raped her as well. When the second boy was committing sexual assault on her, she complained of stomach ache and that she had to go for urination. On this pretext she got down from the car and started running. The driver followed her and caught hold of her because of which she fell down and suffered injuries on her knees. The driver also fell down and suffered injuries on the knees. Hearing the noise one car stopped

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    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

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
    whatsapp-icon Back to top