State of Delhi vs Rupesh and Bhagirath Mathur
-
Upload
deepika-narayan-bhardwaj -
Category
Documents
-
view
223 -
download
0
Transcript of State of Delhi vs Rupesh and Bhagirath Mathur
7/24/2019 State of Delhi vs Rupesh and Bhagirath Mathur
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/state-of-delhi-vs-rupesh-and-bhagirath-mathur 1/26
In the Court of Ms. Kaveri Baweja
Additional Sessions Judge- Special FTC – 2 (Central)
Tis Hazari Courts: Delhi.
Sessions Case No. : 09/2014
Unique ID No. : 02401R0046352014
State versus 1) Rupesh
S/o Sh. Bhagirath Mathur
R/o H. No. A-1/44, Gali No. 28
Bengali Colony, Sant Nagar,
Burari, Delhi-110084
2) Sh. Bhagirath Mathur
S/o Sh. Sukh Ram
R/o H. No. A-1/44, Gali No. 28
Bengali Colony, Sant Nagar,
Burari, Delhi-110084
Case arising out of:
FIR No. : 61/2013
Police Station : Burari
Under Section : 328/376/34 IPC
Judgment reserved on : 27.08.2015
Judgment pronounced on : 02.09.2015
7/24/2019 State of Delhi vs Rupesh and Bhagirath Mathur
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/state-of-delhi-vs-rupesh-and-bhagirath-mathur 2/26
JUDGMENT
CASE OF THE PROSECUTION:-
1. Stating briefly, the facts of the case, as borne out from the
chargesheet are that on receipt of information on 21.02.2013 vide DD No.
36A to W. SI Neeraj, she alongwith Ct. Devender reached at H. No. A-1,
Block, Gali No. 27, Bengali Colony, Sant Nagar, Burari where SI Rajeev
was already present. SI Rajeev handed over counselling report and copy of
MLC of Prosecutrix 'J' to W. SI Neeraj.
2. Prosecutrix 'J' made her statement wherein she stated that she
is a student of B.A. [Pass]. She alleged that on 16.02.2013 at about 2 PM ,
Bhabhi of Accused Rupesh, who lives in front of his house, called her to
repair a bulb in her house. When she reached there Rupesh was already
present there. After sometime, father of Rupesh came there with a bottle
and handed over the said bottle to Accused Rupesh and left from there.
Thereafter, Accused Rupesh forcibly made her consume that bottle and
after consuming the same, she became unconscious. She regained her
7/24/2019 State of Delhi vs Rupesh and Bhagirath Mathur
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/state-of-delhi-vs-rupesh-and-bhagirath-mathur 3/26
consciousness at about 4 PM and realized that she had been raped forcibly.
She came to her house but did not disclose anything to anyone.
3. Complainant 'J' further stated that on 19.02.2013 at about 8
AM she reached at house of Accused Rupesh, where tenant of Rupesh, his
sister, his Mausi and Mausa were already present. She asked Accused
Rupesh as to why he had committed rape upon her, on this Bhabhi of
Accused apologized from her. Upon this Accused Rupesh pushed her
stating that 'Tujhe jo karna hai, kar le'. Mausa of Accused also stated her
to commit suicide. Thereafter, she made a call at 100 number, but her
father and father of Accused compromised the matter on 20.02.2013
stating it to be 'cherkhani'. Prosecutrix 'J' further alleged that on
20.02.2013 at about 8-9 PM, on seeing her, Accused Rupesh taunted her
' Ab tu kati chipkali ki tarah ghoomegi'. She stated that she consumed 'All
Out' mosquito repellent out of depression and was admitted to Hindu Rao
Hospital. On 21.02.2013 she was discharged from the hospital made a
complaint against Accused Rupesh.
4. On the basis of aforesaid, the present case was registered
7/24/2019 State of Delhi vs Rupesh and Bhagirath Mathur
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/state-of-delhi-vs-rupesh-and-bhagirath-mathur 4/26
under Section 328/376/34 IPC. During investigation, W. SI Neeraj
prepared site plan at the instance of Prosecutrix. Statement of Prosecutrix
was got recorded under Section 164 CrPC. Thereafter, further
investigation was transferred to W. SI Santosh Sirohi as W. SI Neeraj was
got transferred. SI Santosh Sirohi obtained NBWs of Accused Rupesh and
Bhagirath from court, but they could not be found. Thereafter, Accused
Rupesh surrendered before the court and he was arrested. Disclosure
statement of Accused Rupesh was recorded. One day police custody
remand of Accused Rupesh was obtained and at his instance, place of
incident was inspected. Accused was got medically examined. His blood
sample was seized and taken into police possession and deposited the same
in malkhana. Potency test of Accused was got conducted from Forensic
Expert, Subzi Mandi, Mortuary, Delhi. Thereafter, Accused was sent in
judicial custody.
5. Anticipatory bail of Accused Bhagirath Mathur, Vinod and
Satyawati was granted. During investigation, SI Santosh Sirohi obtained
age proof of Accused Rupesh as per which the date of birth of Accused
7/24/2019 State of Delhi vs Rupesh and Bhagirath Mathur
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/state-of-delhi-vs-rupesh-and-bhagirath-mathur 5/26
was 15.02.1995. Exhibits of Accused i.e. blood sample was sent to FSL.
Thereafter, W. SI Santosh Sirohi was transferred and further investigation of
this case was assigned to W. SI Mukesh Devi. W. SI Mukesh Devi arrested
Accused Bhagirath and released him as he was already on anticipatory bail.
Accused Vinod and Satyawati were kept in Column No. 12 as there was no
sufficient evidence against them for arrest. The learned MM directed
issuance of summons only against Rupesh and Bhagirth and committed the
case for Sessions trial after complying with provisions of Section 207 Cr.PC.
CHARGE:-
6. After committal of the case, on the basis of material on record,
Accused Rupesh was charged for offence punishable under Section 328/376
IPC while Accused Bhagirath Mathur was charged for offence punishable
under Section 328 r/w Section 109 IPC. Both Accused pleaded not guilty
and claimed trial when the charges were read over and explained to him.
PROSECUTION EVIDENCE:-
7. The evidence led by the Prosecution in the present case can be
7/24/2019 State of Delhi vs Rupesh and Bhagirath Mathur
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/state-of-delhi-vs-rupesh-and-bhagirath-mathur 6/26
categorized under the following heads for the sake of convenience:-
Public Witnesses:-
8. Prosecutrix 'J' was the first witness examined on record. Her
testimony shall be discussed in detail later on in the course of the judgment.
9. PW-2 is Sh.S.S. (name withheld), father of Prosecutrix. He
deposed that on 19.02.2013, Prosecutrix informed him on phone that she
had made a call at 100 number regarding quarrel with Accused Rupesh and
his family. He called her at the shop at Chandni Chowk. Police called them
at PS, but they showed their inability to come to the PS on that day.
10. On 20.02.2013, he along with Prosecutrix 'J' went to PS.
Accused Rupesh and his father Bhagirath were present in the PS. Accused
persons apologized for their conduct in the PS and requested him to
compromise the matter. Thereafter, they did not make any complaint against
them and the matter was compromised between them.
11. PW2 further deposed that on 20.02.2013, in the evening,
Accused Rupesh came in front of their house and he taunted on Prosecutrix
7/24/2019 State of Delhi vs Rupesh and Bhagirath Mathur
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/state-of-delhi-vs-rupesh-and-bhagirath-mathur 7/26
by saying that “tu kati chipkali ki tarah rahegi.” Thereafter, Prosecutrix 'J'
consumed 'All Out' liquid. He made a call at 100 number. Prosecutrix was
taken to Hindu Rao Hospital, where she was admitted and was discharged
on the next day.
12. PW2 further deposed that when there were coming back after
getting Prosecutrix 'J' discharged from the hospital, on the way she told
him that Accused Rupesh had committed rape upon her on 16.02.2013 at
his house and also told the entire facts. Thereafter, they made a complaint
to the police and got registered the FIR. Prosecutrix was given
counselling. She was taken to Aruna Asaf Ali Hospital by the police for
her medical examination. Police recorded his statement.
Medical Evidence:-
13. PW8 Dr. Vishakha Nagraj proved the MLC Ex. PW8/A of
Prosecutrix, prepared by Dr. Reema Mehta, who has since left the services
of hospital and her present whereabouts are not known.
14. PW10 Dr. Abhay Parkash deposed that he had medically
7/24/2019 State of Delhi vs Rupesh and Bhagirath Mathur
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/state-of-delhi-vs-rupesh-and-bhagirath-mathur 8/26
examined Prosecutrix 'J' vide MLC Ex. PW10/A on 20.02.2013 when she
was brought to HRH hospital with alleged history of consuming 'All Out' at
home.
15. PW11 Dr. Geeta proved the Medico Legal Injury sheet No.
1161/13 dated 21.02.2013 Ex. PW11/A of Prosecutrix 'J', which was
prepared by Dr. Sohrab Khan.
Police Witnesses:-
16. PW3 Ct. Devender deposed that on 21.02.2013 he was posted
at PS Burari. On that day, at about 9.30 PM, DD No. 36A was received by
W. SI Neeraj. He alongwith W. SI Neeraj reached at A Block, Gali No. 27,
Bengali Colony, Burari. SI Rajeev of PS Burari alongwith one Ct. met
them there and he handed over some documents to W. SI Neeraj.
Prosecutrix 'J' was also present there. W. SI Neeraj made enquiries from
the Prosecutrix and recorded her statement and prepared a rukka and
handed over the same to PW3, which he took to PS for registration of FIR.
PW4 Ct. Devender handed over the rukka to Duty Officer. After
registration of FIR, Duty Officer handed over original rukka and
7/24/2019 State of Delhi vs Rupesh and Bhagirath Mathur
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/state-of-delhi-vs-rupesh-and-bhagirath-mathur 9/26
computerized copy of FIR to him. He came back to the spot and handed
over the original rukka and copy of FIR to W. SI Neeraj. IO also recorded
statement of father of Prosecutrix. IO inspected the spot at the instance of
the Prosecutrix and prepared the site plan of the house of the Prosecutrix.
They also went to the house of Accused Rupesh, who lives nearby, but he
was not found there. Mother of Accused Rupesh was found present there.
Prosecutrix was taken to Aruna Asaf Ali Hospital for her medical
examination where she was medically examined. They also made search
for the Accused Rupesh, but he could not be found. They came back to PS.
IO recorded statement of PW3.
17. PW4 W. SI Neeraj deposed that on 21.02.2013 she was posted
as SI at PS Burari. On that day, one receipt of DD No. 36A Ex. PW4/A,
she alongwith Ct. Devender reached at Gali No. 27, Bengali Colony, Sant
Nagar, Burari. SI Rajeev met her there. SI Rajeev produced the
Prosecutrix 'J' before her and also handed over MLC of Prosecutrix and
some other relevant documents to him. She recorded the statement of
Prosecutrix which is already Ex. PW1/A and prepared a rukka thereon
7/24/2019 State of Delhi vs Rupesh and Bhagirath Mathur
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/state-of-delhi-vs-rupesh-and-bhagirath-mathur 10/26
which is Ex. PW4/B and handed over the same to Ct. Devender, who took
it to PS for registration of FIR and handed over the original rukka and copy
of FIR to her. W.SI Neeraj inspected the spot at the instance of the
Prosecutrix and prepared the site plan which is already Ex. PW1/D and
took the Prosecutrix to Aruna Asaf Ali Hospital and her gynecological
examination was got conducted there. Thereafter, PW4 alongwith the
Prosecutrix came back to the house of the Prosecutrix and recorded the
supplementary statement of Prosecutrix and statement of her father. They
came back to PS and recorded the statement of Ct. Devender and SI
Rajeev.
18. PW4 W. SI Neeraj further deposed that on 27.02.2013,
statement of Prosecutrix was got recorded under Section 164 CrPC. She
collected the copy of the same. On 28.02.2013 Prosecutrix handed over
the copy of her marksheet of class X already marked as Mark PW1/X,
which she seized vide seizure memo already Ex. PW1/C. On 20.03.2013
she handed over the case file to MHC[R] as she was transferred from PS
Burari.
7/24/2019 State of Delhi vs Rupesh and Bhagirath Mathur
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/state-of-delhi-vs-rupesh-and-bhagirath-mathur 11/26
19. PW5 ASI Jaswant was the Duty Officer, who recorded FIR
No. 61/2013 PD Burari, computerized copy of which is Ex. PW5/A.
20. PW6 SI Rajiv deposed that on 20.02.2013 he was posted as SI
at PS Burari and was on night emergency duty from 8 PM to 8 AM. On
that day, at about 10.15 PM, he received DD No. 42A Ex. PW6/A that one
girl has consumed 'All Out'. On receipt of the said information, he along
with one Constable reached at A-1 Block, Gali No. 27, Bengali Colony,
Delhi. There, he came to know that the girl, who had consumed 'All Out'
has already been taken to Bara Hindu Rao Hospital by the PCR. He
reached at PS Bara Hindu Rao and collected the MLC of the Prosecutrix,
who had been declared unfit for statement by the doctors and returned to
the PS along with MLC.
21. PW6 further deposed that on next date 21.02.2013, he
received information that Prosecutrix is discharged from the hospital. He
went to her house and made enquiries from her and also got her counseled
through a lady counselor. PW6 called W. SI Neeraj from PS and handed
7/24/2019 State of Delhi vs Rupesh and Bhagirath Mathur
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/state-of-delhi-vs-rupesh-and-bhagirath-mathur 12/26
over the counselling report and MLC of Prosecutrix to W. SI Neeraj and he
was relieved. IO recorded his statement.
22. PW7 W. SI Mukesh Devi deposed that on 23.09.2013, this
case was assigned to her for further investigation. She received the case
file from MHC[R]. On 18.10.2013, she formally arrested the Accused
Bhagirath vide arrest memo Ex. PW7/A and released on bail as he was
already on anticipatory bail. After completion of investigation,
chargesheet was prepared against Accused Rupesh and Accused Bhagirath
and filed in court.
23. PW9 SI Santosh Sirohi deposed that on 10.03.2013, this case
was assigned to her for further investigation. She made search for the
Accused involved in this case and reached at the house of Accused at Sant
Nagar, Burari. The house was found locked. She got NBWs of Accused
persons Rupesh and Bhagirath issued from court.
24. PW9 SI Santosh Sirohi further deposed that on 07.05.2013
Accused Rupesh surrendered in court of Ld. MM. With the permission of
7/24/2019 State of Delhi vs Rupesh and Bhagirath Mathur
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/state-of-delhi-vs-rupesh-and-bhagirath-mathur 13/26
the court, she interrogated the Accused Rupesh and arrested him vide
arrest memo Ex. PW9/A and conducted his personal search vide Ex.
PW9/B. PW9 SI Santosh Sirohi recorded the disclosure statement of
Accused vide Ex. PW9/C. Accused was taken on PC remand for one day,
but nothing incriminating could be recovered. Accused Rupesh was
medically examined vide MLC Ex. PW9/D and his potency test was got
conducted on 08.05.2013 vide report Ex. PW9/E. Examining doctor
handed over the blood sample of Accused in sealed condition which he
seized vide seizure memo Ex. PW9/F. Exhibits were deposited in
malkhana. PW9 recorded the statement of witnesses, thereafter, she was
transferred and further investigation was handed over to SI Mukesh.
STATEMENT OF ACCUSED PERSONS UNDER SECTION 313
CrPC:-
25. In his statement recorded under Section 313 CrPC, Accused
Rupesh pleaded innocence and false implication in this case by Prosecutrix
for taking revenge and extorting money from him and his family members.
Accused stated that Prosecutrix used to give tuition classes to him for XII
7/24/2019 State of Delhi vs Rupesh and Bhagirath Mathur
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/state-of-delhi-vs-rupesh-and-bhagirath-mathur 14/26
class and she had love fantasy towards him, but he was not aware of the
same. On 15.02.2013, it was his 18th birthday, she gifted a teddy bear to
him and proposed him for marriage with her. He was surprised and
refused her proposal.
26. Accused Rupesh further stated that he was studying in Govt.
Boys Sr. Sec. School, CC Colony, Pratap Bagh, Delhi-9 and on 16.02.2013
it was his board examination of physical education XII class and it was
held till 1.30 PM. He and his friends were in school till 2 PM and they
took their photographs in school. Thereafter, they reached at China Town
Shop at Gupta Colony, Pratap Bagh, Delhi for taking refreshment.
Thereafter, they reached Camp Chowk by walking. From there his friends
boarded buses for Burari and other places and he also boarded a bus for
Jahangirpuri, Delhi, from where he took his married sister alongwith him
and at about 4.15-4.30 PM, he reached his house alongwith his sister as
some relatives were gathered at their house for his marriage talks with
daughter of Sh. Kunwar Pal. His marriage was fixed on the same day and
he got married with the daughter of Sh. Kunwar Pal on 16.02.2014.
7/24/2019 State of Delhi vs Rupesh and Bhagirath Mathur
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/state-of-delhi-vs-rupesh-and-bhagirath-mathur 15/26
27. In his statement under Section 313 CrPC, Accused Bhagirath
stated that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He is
vegetable seller and on the date of incident, he was on his job.
DEFENCE EVIDENCE :-
28. Accused examined two defence witnesses. DW1 Daudayal
deposed that on 2012-2013, he was a student of Government Boys Senior
Secondary School, CC Colony, Delhi-9. He was a student of XII class and
Accused Rupesh was his classmate.
29. DW1 proved his mark-sheet and certificate of class XII, which
are Ex. DW1/A and Ex. DW1/B respectively. He deposed that on
16.02.2013, i.e. the date of alleged incident they had their Physical
Education Examination in school and from 10 AM to 12 Noon, practical of
physical education examination was conducted in playground and their
theoretical examination was conducted from 12 noon to 1.30 PM on that
day. As it was their last examination of class XII, they came to the
playground after the examination and took photographs with friends.
7/24/2019 State of Delhi vs Rupesh and Bhagirath Mathur
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/state-of-delhi-vs-rupesh-and-bhagirath-mathur 16/26
30. DW1 deposed that he alongwith Accused Rupesh and other
boys namely Bablu and Sanjeev Pal remained in the school till 2 PM and
they took their photographs in school playground since it was their last day
of class XII. From school, they reached at China Town Fast Food Store
and thereafter, they proceeded towards Kingsway Camp Chowk. At about
3 PM, they all reached at Camp Chowk, Rupesh told them that he has to go
to Jahangirpuri for taking sister to home, as his some relatives are
supposed to come at his house for his marriage talks. Rupesh left for going
to house of his sister by bus and they left for their houses.
31. DW2 ASI Umed Pal brought the summoned record of DD No.
28B, DD No. 43B and DD No. 68B, all dated 08.05.2014, copy of which
are Ex. DW2/A, Ex. PW2/B and Ex. PW2/C respectively.
ARGUMENTS, ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS:
32. I have heard detailed arguments advanced by Ld. Counsel for
Accused as well as Ld. Addl. PP for the State and gone through the
evidence on record.
33. The testimony of the Prosecutrix is undoubtedly the most
7/24/2019 State of Delhi vs Rupesh and Bhagirath Mathur
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/state-of-delhi-vs-rupesh-and-bhagirath-mathur 17/26
relevant piece of evidence in the present case. Upon stepping into the
witness box, the Prosecutrix PW1 'J' deposed that on 16.02.2013 at about 2
PM, she was called by Bhabhi of Accused to her house to fix a bulb.
Accused was present there and when she was trying to fix the bulb, father
of Accused also reached there and gave a bottle to Accused Rupesh and
thereafter, he left from there. Bhabhi of Accused also left stating that she
will return shortly. Thereafter, Accused Rupesh forced her to consume the
liquid which was in that bottle. It was having foul smell and she became
unconscious after consuming it. PW1 further deposed that upon regaining
consciousness, she found only Accused Rupesh was present there and she
was in naked condition and she realized that Accused had established
physical relations with her while she was unconscious. She further
deposed that Accused Rupesh told her not to disclose about it to anyone
stating that it will only bring bad name to her. She wore her clothes and
return to her house and did not disclose anything to any of her family
members.
34. On 19.02.2013 at about 8 AM, she went to the house of
7/24/2019 State of Delhi vs Rupesh and Bhagirath Mathur
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/state-of-delhi-vs-rupesh-and-bhagirath-mathur 18/26
Accused Rupesh where his sister, his Mausa and his Mausi were present.
She enquired from Accused Rupesh as to why he had committed said act
with her. Upon enquiry, she also narrated the entire incident to the sister
of Accused, who asked Accused to apologize for his conduct, but Accused
Rupesh pushed and also abused her to do whatever she wanted to do. His
Mausa told her to commit suicide.
35. PW1 further deposed that, thereafter, she made a call at 100
number. Since the police did not come, she went to the office of her father
at Chandni Chowk and did not tell her father that Accused Rupesh had
raped her, but she had only told him that she had a quarrel with Accused
Rupesh. The witness was questioned as to why she did not tell to her
father about the incident of rape. She responded that she did not confide in
her father as she was afraid that he will scold her.
36. On 20.02.2013 the matter was compromised as her father went
to the house of Accused. However, Accused Rupesh while going from in
front of her house taunted her by saying that she have not been able to do
anything against him. He also stated that “ab tu kati chipkali ki tarah
7/24/2019 State of Delhi vs Rupesh and Bhagirath Mathur
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/state-of-delhi-vs-rupesh-and-bhagirath-mathur 19/26
ghumegi.” She deposed that feeling humiliated, she consumed 'All Out '
mosquito repellent. Thereafter, her family members took her to Hindu Rao
Hospital and she remained admitted there till 21.02.2013. Upon enquiry
by her father, she narrated all the facts to him and ultimately case was
registered on her complaint Ex. PW1/A.
37. It has been argued by Ld. Defence Counsel that the testimony
of the Prosecutrix in the present case does not inspire confidence and her
statement is full of embellishments and improvements, as is apparent on
going through her cross-examination. It is submitted that Prosecutrix 'J'
has falsely implicated Accused in this case as he refused to marry her
though she was very much interested in marrying Accused Rupesh.
38. On the other hand, Ld. Addl. PP contended that testimony of
the Prosecutrix establishes the case of the Prosecution beyond reasonable
doubt and both the Accused should be convicted for the alleged offences.
39. A careful perusal of testimony of Prosecutrix in its entirety
would, however, reveal that she cannot be said to be a credible witness and
her statement is not worthy of reliance. During her cross-examination, she
7/24/2019 State of Delhi vs Rupesh and Bhagirath Mathur
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/state-of-delhi-vs-rupesh-and-bhagirath-mathur 20/26
was confronted by her previous statements by Ld. Defence Counsel and
she certainly made various improvements upon stepping into the witness
box.
40. A perusal of cross-examination of PW1 'J' would also reveal
that she admitted in the course of cross-examination that there are other
residential houses near place of incident i.e. house of Bhabhi of Accused
Rupesh and the area is thickly populated. She did not raise any alarm or
made any attempt to escape from the house of Bhabhi of Accused when
Accused Rupesh allegedly forced her to consume foul smell liquid bottle
brought by co-Accused Bhagirath. As per Prosecutrix, she was studying in
B. A. Second year at the time of alleged incident. There is no explanation
as to why she did not even try to resist the alleged acts of Accused Rupesh,
who forced her to consume a foul smell liquid.
41. Be that as it may, it is extremely difficult to accept as to why
Prosecutrix did not reveal about the alleged rape to her family members,
but would go and talked about the incident on 19.02.2013 to the family
7/24/2019 State of Delhi vs Rupesh and Bhagirath Mathur
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/state-of-delhi-vs-rupesh-and-bhagirath-mathur 21/26
members of the Accused. No reason has been furnished by the Prosecutrix
as to why she did not confide in her family members about the alleged rape
committed upon her by Accused Rupesh on 16.02.2013. Her claim that
Accused told her not to disclose it to anyone as it will bring bad name to
her, does not appeal to reason as she went ahead and talked to the family
members of the offender himself.
42. Moreover, surprisingly she did not utter a word about it to her
father even her father went to PS on 20.12.2013 and allegedly
compromised the matter with the father of Accused. PW2 father of the
Prosecutrix also deposed that on 20.02.2013 he alongwith Prosecutrix went
to PS where both Accused persons were present and matter was
compromised between them. Strangely, even when the matter was being
compromised in presence of Prosecutrix 'J', she did not utter any word
regarding alleged rape committed by Accused Rupesh upon her. More so,
when it is her own claim that on 19.02.2013 itself, she had gone to the
house of Accused at about 8 AM and narrated all the facts to his sister. It
is highly unnatural that a rape victim would not disclose the true facts to
7/24/2019 State of Delhi vs Rupesh and Bhagirath Mathur
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/state-of-delhi-vs-rupesh-and-bhagirath-mathur 22/26
her family members, merely because of the reason that her father would
scold her and her father would go to the house of the Accused without
knowing the complete facts and compromise the matter with him and his
family.
43. I also find no force in the case of the Prosecution to the effect
that Prosecutrix consumed 'All Out' on 20.02.2013 when Accused Rupesh
while going from in front of her house taunted her by saying “ab tu kati
chipkali ki tarah ghumegi.” In this regard, my attention is drawn by Ld.
Defence Counsel to DD No. 42A dated 20.02.2013 PS Burari Ex. PW2/A.
As per this DD entry, it was reported at PS Burari that one girl has
consumed All Out in front of PS Burari on 20.02.2013 at 22:15 hours. In
view of the said DD entry Ex. PW6/A, it is apparent that contention of the
Defence is correct that Prosecutrix had in fact consumed All Out while
standing in front of PS Burari only to pressurize the police to register case
against Accused.
44. During the course of cross-examination, PW1 also admitted
that several other cases have been registered on the basis of complaint
7/24/2019 State of Delhi vs Rupesh and Bhagirath Mathur
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/state-of-delhi-vs-rupesh-and-bhagirath-mathur 23/26
made by her against different persons. She also admitted that she got
registered case FIR No. 160/2011 under Section 376/342/506 IPC PS
Bhalswa Dairy against one Jinnha, copy of FIR is Ex PW1/DA; FIR No.
412/2011 under Section 341/354/323 IPC PS Jyoti Nagar against Jinnha,
the copy of FIR is Ex. PW1/DB; FIR No. 348/2011 under Section 363 IPC
PS Burari against Jinnha, the copy of FIR is Ex. PW1/DC; FIR No.
84/2012 under Section 509/506/34 IPC PS Bhalaswa Diary against
brothers of Jinnha namely Mohd. Naeem and Mohd. Hassan, copy of same
is Ex. PW1/DD. It was contended by Ld. Defence Counsel that Prosecutrix
and her family members are habitual of filing false cases against different
persons only with a view to extort money from them and the Accused
persons in the present case have also been falsely implicated by the
Prosecutrix.
45. It is further, noteworthy that in the course of cross-
examination of Prosecutrix 'J', Defence put to her various text messages
sent on the mobile phone of Accused Rupesh from her mobile Nos.
8882093798 and 8527346190. Prosecutrix 'J' admitted that mobile No.
7/24/2019 State of Delhi vs Rupesh and Bhagirath Mathur
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/state-of-delhi-vs-rupesh-and-bhagirath-mathur 24/26
8527346190 is mobile number of her house though she denied that mobile
No. 8883093798 belongs to her. When she was questioned about the
aforesaid text messages sent from mobile Nos. 8882093798 and
8527346190 to the mobile number of Accused Rupesh, she denied having
sent any message to him, but voluntarily added that it may be possible that
the said text messages Ex. PW1/D-2 were sent to Accused Rupesh by his
various girl friends. The aforesaid explanation put forth by the Prosecutrix
is not only highly improbable, but also apparently false.
46. I am also unable to accept the testimony of the Prosecutrix that
she was forced by Accused Rupesh to consume intoxicating liquid on
16.02.2013. It is also highly improbable that father of Accused Rupesh i.e.
co-Accused Bhagirath would bring the said intoxicating liquid in a bottle
in the house of Bhabhi of Accused Rupesh and forced to consume the
same. It is own claim of Bhabhi of Accused Rupesh that she was present
in the house. It has also come on record during her testimony that there
were other houses in the vicinity. There is no reason as to why she did not
try to raise an alarm against Accused Rupesh when he was forcing her to
7/24/2019 State of Delhi vs Rupesh and Bhagirath Mathur
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/state-of-delhi-vs-rupesh-and-bhagirath-mathur 25/26
consume the intoxicating liquid when it is her own claim that it was foul
smelling. There is no explanation for this unnatural conduct of the
Prosecutrix and also makes her claim highly doubtful.
47. Considering the above discussion and the evidence on record,
it is evident that Prosecutrix 'J' cannot be termed as reliable and credible
witness. Her testimony does not inspire confidence. The Accused, in these
circumstances, cannot be convicted for the alleged offences on the basis of
such unreliable piece of evidence.
48. Consequently, upon considering the entire evidence on record,
Accused Rupesh S/o Bhagirath Mathur and Bhagirath Mathur S/o Sh. Sukh
Ram are hereby acquitted. Bail bonds cancelled. Sureties discharged.
49. File be consigned to Record Room.
Announced in the Open Court
on 02nd
day of September, 2015.
(Kaveri Baweja)
Additional Sessions Judge- Special FTC-2 (Central)
Tis Hazari Courts: Delhi.
7/24/2019 State of Delhi vs Rupesh and Bhagirath Mathur
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/state-of-delhi-vs-rupesh-and-bhagirath-mathur 26/26