Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
State, Govt of NCT of Delhi – Appellant
Versus
Vinod Bhardwaj, S/o. Sh. Murli Ram Bhardwaj, C/o. Krishan Kumar Chauhan – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.
1. Criminal Appeal under Section 377(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “Cr.P.C.”) has been filed on behalf of the State seeking setting aside of Judgment dated 03.08.2019 whereby the Respondent, Vinod Bhardwaj has been acquitted under Sections 328/354/354D/384 Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as “IPC”){though convicted under S.323 and S.506(1) IPC}.
2. Also, enhancement of sentence awarded vide Order on Sentence dated 03.08.2019 whereby the Respondent has been sentenced only to fine of Rs.1,000/- for offence punishable under Section 323 IPC and Rs.5,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 506(I) IPC, in case FIR No. 0155/2014 dated 31.01.2014 registered under Sections 323/328/354/354A/354D/384/506 IPC at P.S. Vasant Kunj (South).
3. Brief facts are that a Complaint dated 31.01.2014 was filed by the Complainant/Prosecutrix against the Respondent/Accused Vinod Bhardwaj on the allegation that in the year 2013, while the Prosecutrix used to work as a maid at the rented house of the Respondent at Rangpuri, Delhi, she was administered some stupefying substance in a cold drink i.e., Pepsi by the Re
The prosecution must establish the evidence beyond reasonable doubt for conviction; any acquittal based on insufficient evidence is justifiable under law.
In appeals against acquittal, material contradictions in prosecution witnesses, doubtful presence, and failure to examine natural witnesses entitle accused to benefit of doubt where two views possibl....
(1) Conviction cannot be based solely on statements made by accused under sub-section (1) of Section 313 of Cr.P.C.(B) Gang rape – Enhancement in sentence is not justified many years after incident.
The judgment emphasizes the need for substantive evidence and highlights that suspicion cannot substitute proof. It also underscores the importance of scrutinizing circumstantial evidence in a carefu....
The acquittal of the accused was upheld due to insufficient evidence and inconsistencies in the victim's testimony, demonstrating the high burden of proof required in rape cases.
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
