Hon’ble Mrs. Ranjana Pandya, J.—Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment and order dated 28.2.2015 passed by Sri Vinod Singh Rawat, Additional Sessions Judge, Room No. IX, Ghaziabad, Fast Track Court No. 1 (Crime against women), in S.T. No. 69 of 2014 (State v. Pradeep), registered as Case Crime No. 1109 of 2013, under Sections 376 I.P.C. and Section 66(A) and 67 I.T. Act, Police Station Sihani Gate, District Ghaziabad, whereby the appellant was acquitted for the charges under Section 66 (E) I.T. Act but the accused appellant was found guilty under Section 376 and 506 I.P.C and had been sentenced for seven years rigorous imprisonment with Rs. 20,000/- as fine, under Section 376 I.P.C. and two years imprisonment and Rs. 5000/- as fine under Section 506 I.P.C. with default stipulation.

2. Filtering out unnecessary details, the prosecution version as unfolded during trial is that a report was lodged by the prosecutrix stating that she is resident of 226, Nasirpur, P.S. Sihani Gate, District Ghzaiabad. She was married on 22.5.2013 to one Jeetu resident of village Abdullahpur, Police Station Bhawanpur, Meerut but at the time of lodging of the First Information Report she was residing with her mother. She was being defamed for the last one year by the accused Pradeep. He had in his possession some obscene photographs of the victim and the accused. The accused prepared some obscene video clips of the informant on the basis of which he blackmailed the victim. He made physical relations with the victim by threatening her and showing her the video clips to the in-laws of the victim at Meerut due to which her husband has divorced her. He has also uploaded these photographs and video clips on the internet. The victim is finding it difficult to live in the society and any untoward incident may take place with her, hence, the written report has been lodged.

3. On the basis of this written report, a case was registered at Case Crime No. 1109 of 2013. The investigation was entrusted to PW-5 S.I. Subhash Chandra Gautam. He recorded the statement of the victim and sent the victim for medical examination. He arrested the accused, on the basis of information given by the informer and from his possession a mobile Nokia C-3 was recovered about which the accused confessed that it was having obscene videos of the victim. The Sub Inspector tried to find independent witnesses but nobody was willing to become a witness, hence the mobile was sealed on the spot. Recovery memo was prepared, signatures of the accused and police personnel were obtained on the recovery memo which was proved as Exhibit Ka-9. The arrest memo was also prepared on the spot which was signed by the accused and proved by this witness as Exhibit Ka-10. The G.D. was prepared by the Constable Clerk which was proved by this witness as Exhibit Ka-11. During the course of statement of this witness, a sealed bundle was opened before the Court. The clothes were proved as material Exhibit -1, mobile as material Exhibit -2, battery as material Exhibit -3, SIM as material Exhibit -4 and memory card as material Exhibit Ka -5. After that, this witness was transferred, due to which, further investigation was done by S.I Mahaveer Singh PW-7. He perused the case diary and got the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. on 19.10.2013. He copied this statement in the case diary and proved the application as Exhibit Ka-13. He further summoned the report whether the victim was a member of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribes. He also summoned the evidence regarding the accused belonging to a Back Ward Class. The father of the accused had stated that he belonged to Scheduled Caste (Kori) and he concluded that no case under Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribes Act was made out. When he tried to trace the medical report, he found that lady Constable Minakshi had got the victim medically examined on 4.9.2013 and she has also received the original copy of the medical report who has