Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Sudhanshu Dhulia, Ravindra Maithani, JJ.
Ashok Kumar - Appellant
Vs.
State of Uttarakhand - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 427, 447 of 2013
Decided On : 21-02-2019
Rape - Criminal Law - IPC 376, 366, 120-B, 354 - SC/ST Act - 3(2)(v) - [The judgment discusses the conviction of the accused Pramod Gupta and Ashok Kumar under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The court analyzes the evidence presented, including the testimony of the prosecutrix, medical reports, and the conduct of the prosecutrix before and after the incident. The court finds that the prosecution has not been able to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt against the appellants and concludes that the conviction was not proper. The appeals are allowed, and the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellants are set aside.]
Fact of the Case:
The prosecutrix, a college student, was enticed by the accused Ashok Kumar, who promised her a government job. She was taken to a hotel where she was raped by Pramod Gupta and later subjected to unnatural sex by Ashok Kumar. The prosecutrix was traumatized and feared for her safety due to blackmailing by the accused. She lodged an FIR after two months of the incident.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the delay in lodging the FIR was not adequately explained, and the prosecutrix's conduct after the incident raised doubts about her testimony. The court concluded that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt against the appellants.
Issues: The issues revolved around the delay in lodging the FIR, the credibility of the prosecutrix's testimony, and the absence of corroboration for the prosecution's case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the delay in lodging the FIR and the prosecutrix's conduct after the incident raised doubts about her testimony. The court also emphasized the need for corroboration when relying on the sole testimony of the prosecutrix.
Final Decision: The appeals were allowed, and the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellants were set aside. The bail bonds of the appellants were cancelled, and their sureties were discharged.
Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.
Both these appeals are against a common judgment and order dated 25/26.09.2013 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge S.C. S.T. Act, Dehradun in Special Sessions Trial No. 38 of 2008 convicting Pramod Gupta and Ashok Kumar and acquitting the third accused Pravin Kumar. The accused Pramod Gupta and Ashok Kumar, who are appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 447 of 2013 and Criminal Appeal No. 427 of 2013, respectively have been convicted and sentenced as under:
Accused Pramod Gupta has been convicted under Section 376 (2) (g) and Section 366 IPC and has been sentenced for life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 50,000/- under Section 376 (2) (g) IPC and rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years with a fine of Rs. 5,000/- under Section 366 IPC. Accused Pramod Gupta has also been convicted under Section 3 (2) (v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and has been sentenced for life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 10,000/-.
The accused Ashok Kumar has been convicted under Sections 120-B, 354, 366 IPC and has been sentenced for rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years with a fine of Rs. 2,000/- under Section 120-B of IPC, rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years under Section 354 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years with a fine of Rs. 2,000/- under Section 366 IPC.
2. On 19.04.2008, the prosecutrix, who was undergoing her graduation course was taken by the accused Ashok Kumar to a place called “Saharanpur Chowk” in Dehradun and then was asked by Ashok Kumar to accompany the second accused Pramod Gupta, to a hotel. The case of the prosecution is that prosecutrix was enticed by Ashok Kumar, as he assured her that Pramod Gupta (who is the co-accused), would get her a Government job in the Secretariat at Dehradun. She was asked to accompany Pramod Gupta to a hotel, as her job interview was to be conducted there. On this assurance, prosecutrix went with Pramod Gupta to the hotel, where on her request she was given a glass of water, which was allegedly spiked and caused dizziness to the prosecutrix. Pramod Gupta then took her to a room of the hotel, where she was raped by him. Later he took her nude photographs and soon thereafter three more persons arrived in the room of the hotel, who also raped the prosecutrix.
3. The prosecutrix was then dropped by Pramod Gupta at “Saharanpur Chowk”, where Ashok Kumar was waiting for her in his vehicle. She was then taken to an isolated place by Ashok Kumar, where Ashok Kumar subjected her to unnatural sex by inserting a glass bottle inside her vagina. Here it must be stated that Ashok Kumar is a physically challenged person. He has a locomotor disability of both legs, and the vehicle he drives (of which a reference has come at some places), is also a specially designed vehicle for the disabled.
4. After this incident, the prosecutrix went to her house where she was completely traumatized. She feared both Ashok Kumar, as well as Pramod Gupta, for reasons that Pramod Gupta had taken her photographs and she was being blackmailed, on the strength of the photographs.
5. It was after the incident that Ashok Kumar admitted her in an institute, to undergo a course, which was being conducted by an NGO called “Samadhan”, and it was during undergoing this course, that the prosecutrix revealed her story to her roommate called Shruti Sinha. Shruti Sinha in turn communicated this to the incharge of the NGO i.e. Ms. Renu D. Singh (PW 3). Thereafter the in-charge of the N.G.O., namely, Ms. Renu D. Singh assured the prosecutrix that she must bring the culprits to justice and lodge a first information report against them, so that justice be done. Having gained in confidence, the prosecutrix lodged the first information report at Police Station Rajpur, District Dehradun on 19.06.2008 at 09:30 p.m. The FIR was lodged against Ashok Kumar and four other unknown persons, as till this time, even the iden
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
