The judgment emphasizes the need for substantial evidence to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, the importance of considering delay in filing the FIR, and the caution against solely relying on the statement of the prosecutrix.

Headnote:
IPC - Acquittal - Sections 376, 354, 354-B, 506, 509 - The court acquitted the respondent on the ground that prosecution failed to prove the guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubt.
Fact of the Case:

The appellant, a JBT student, accused the respondent of committing obscene acts on her. The trial court acquitted the respondent due to lack of evidence.
Finding of the Court:

The trial court found that the prosecution failed to connect the accused with the offense and essential ingredients for proving the charges were not proved.
Issues: The main issues were the credibility of the appellant's allegations, delay in filing the FIR, and contradictions in the evidence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the statement of the prosecutrix must be given predominant consideration but cautioned against implicating someone solely based on the statement. The court also highlighted the importance of considering delay in filing the FIR and the need for substantial and compelling reasons to disturb a trial court's acquittal.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the trial court's acquittal of the respondent.

JUDGMENT

Jagmohan Bansal, J. - The appellant, at whose complaint FIR No.191 dated 19.09.2017 under Sections 376, 354, 354-B, 506 and 509 IPC at Police Station Kosli was registered, has preferred, along with an application under Section 378 (4) present appeal, seeking setting aside of judgment and order dated 01.05.2019 whereby learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rewari (for short 'trial court') has acquitted the respondent on the ground that prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubt.

Brief Facts:

2. The brief facts emerging from record which are necessary for adjudication of present appeal are that the appellant is a qualified JBT (Junior Basic Training) and pursuing her final year course of B.A. As per appellant, on 31.05.2017 and 02.07.2017, respondent No.2-Satish along with his family members came to her house and a ring ceremony was performed. On 09.08.2017, respondent called appellant to come to Kosli and she after getting permission of her parents went to meet respondent at Bus Stand, Kosli. The respondent took her away on his bike to 7 days Rooms and Restaurant, Kosli' and they spent half an hour in the said restaurant where respondent clicked her photographs and they took cold drink. The respondent tried to get a room in the hotel, however, staff refused to give him room. The respondent thereafter took her away on his bike to Kosli, Dauroli Road near BKD School where he did obscene acts. He pressed her breast, broke string of her salwar and inserted his fingers in her private parts. She told the respondent that she would not establish physical relation with him till the marriage but respondent got offended and threatened not only to kill her but also not to marry her and then left the place. The appellant returned to her home and on 12.08.2017 as well 14.08.2017 received calls from respondent's mobile who threatened her to kill her. A lady called from the mobile of respondent who claimed to be wife of the respondent and abused her (appellant). She got frightened and perturbed. She did not disclose this fact to her family members, however, her mother used to ask her as to why she was keeping disturbed and when her mother pressurized her, she disclosed her about the entire occurrence on 17.09.2017. Her mother told the entire facts to her father who tried to contact family members of accused, however, they did not take call of her father. On 18.09.2017, she went to Women Police Station, Jhajjar, where she filed an application and Jhajjar Police Authorities transferred the matter to Police Station Kosli in view of territorial jurisdiction. On 19.09.2017, she went to Kosli and apprised the police official about the incident occurred on 09.08.2017. The lady police official brought her to Government Hospital, Rewari, where she was medico-legally examined.

2.1 On the basis of complaint of appellant, an FIR No.191 dated 19.09.2017 was registered under Sections 376, 354, 354-B, 506 and 509 IPC at Police Station Kosli.

2.2 On 08.11.2017, police arrested respondent who at that time was serving Indian Army. The police after completing investigation filed its report under Section 173 of Cr.P.C.

3. During the course of trial, prosecution examined 17 witnesses which included appellant, father of appellant, owner of hotel, doctors and different police officials. The respondent examined 04 witnesses. The statement of respondent was recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. wherein he denied allegations of prosecution and pleaded that he has been falsely implicated.

The prime and material witnesses of the prosecution were appellant, her father and owner of the afore-stated hotel. The appellant appeared before trial Court as PW11 and reiterated her statement which at the time of registration of FIR was made before

police authorities. Father of appellant appeared as PW14 and verbatim narrated facts as narrated by appellant. Chanderdeep @ Parul owner of afore-stated hotel appeared as PW1 and deposed that appellant and