Crl.A.1077/2014 Page 1 of 10

$

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

RESERVED ON : 28^th January, 2016

DECIDED ON : 17^th March, 2016

+

CRL.A.1077/2014

PRAMOD KUMAR

..... Appellant

Through :

Mr.Anil Bhardwaj, Advocate.

VERSUS

STATE

..... Respondent

Through :

Mr.Tarang Srivastava, APP.

CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG

S.P.GARG, J.

1.

Challenge in this appeal is to a judgment dated 09.05.2014 of

learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.141/13 arising out

of FIR No.344/13 PS Subhash Place whereby the appellant-Pramod

Kumar was convicted for committing offences punishable under Sections

363/341/323 IPC and Section 7 POCSO Act punishable under Section 8

of POCSO Act. By an order dated 17.05.2014, the appellant was awarded

Rigorous Imprisonment for three years with fine of `3,000/- under Section

363 IPC; Simple Imprisonment for one month with a fine of `500 under

Section 341/323 IPC each; Rigorous Imprisonment for five years with

Crl.A.1077/2014 Page 2 of 10

fine of `5,000/- under Section 8 of POCSO Act. All the sentences were to

run concurrently.

2.

Briefly stated, the prosecution case as reflected in the charge-

sheet was that on 31.07.2013 in between 12.15 to 12.45 pm at G-560,

Fourth Floor, J.J.Colony, Shakurpur, Delhi, the appellant kidnapped the

prosecutrix ‘X’(changed name) aged about 6/7 years from the lawful

guardianship of her mother and confined her in his room wrongfully. It is

alleged that in the room, the appellant kissed her face and breast, made her

to sit on his lap and attempted to remove her panty with sexual intent.

The incident was reported to the police on 10.08.2013 and the

Investigating Officer after recording statement of victim’s mother-

Shaheen Bano (Ex.PW-6/A) lodged First Information Report. ‘X’ was

medically examined; she recorded her 164 Cr.P.C.statement. The accused

was arrested and medically examined. Statements of witnesses conversant

with the facts were recorded. Upon completion of investigation, a charge-

sheet was filed against the appellant in the court. The prosecution

examined nine witnesses to prove its case. In 313 statement, the appellant

denied his involvement in the crime and pleaded false implication due to

non-payment of loan amount of `4,000/- advanced by him to victim’s

Crl.A.1077/2014 Page 3 of 10

mother. The trial resulted in conviction as mentioned previously. Being

aggrieved and dissatisfied, the instant appeal has been preferred.

3.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have

examined the file. Counsel urged that the Trial Court did not appreciate

the evidence in its true and proper perspective. Material infirmities

emerging in the statements of prosecution witnesses were ignored without

cogent reasons. Ten days’ delay in lodging the FIR has remained

unexplained. The victim did not sustain any injury whatsoever on her

body. The victim has been tutored to make a statement by her mother and

no reliance can be placed on it. ‘X’ gave statement to the police at the

behest of her mother. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor refuting the

contentions, urged that there are no sound reasons to disbelieve the minor

victim.

4.

Admitted position is that the prosecutrix ‘X’ and her mother

Shaheen Bano lived on the third floor of the house and the appellant lived

on the fourth floor as a tenant. In her complaint (Ex.PW-6/A), victim’s

mother gave detailed account as to how and under what manner, her

daughter ‘X’ aged around 6/7 years was sexually assaulted by the

appellant on that day. The victim recorded her 164 Cr.P.C. statement on

12.08.2013.