State v. Munazir Alm @ Munna

S. RAVINDRA BHAT,J

S.P.GARG, J

JANUARY 06, 2012

'ajk'

Page 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 06.01.2012 + CRL.L.P. 533/2011 STATE ..... Petitioner Through : Sh. Sanjay Lao, APP. versus MUNAZIR ALAM @ MUNNA ..... Respondent Through : Nemo. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % Crl. M.A. 17587/2011 in Crl. L.P. 533/2011 1. For the reasons mentioned in the application, Crl. M.A. 17587/2011 is allowed. Crl. M.A. 17587/2011 is accordingly disposed of. Crl. L.P. 533/2011 2. The State seeks leave to appeal against the judgment and order of the learned Page 2 Addl. Sessions Judge dated 18.01.2011 in S.C. No. 06/10/08. The respondent (accused before the Trial Court) has been acquitted of the charges punishable under Sections 376/307/506 IPC. 3. The prosecution case was that the police received information – through D.D. Entry No. 8A on 06.10.2007 that a girl, "X", aged 14 years, resident of Sant Nagar had been admitted on account of burn injuries, allegedly caused by a boy (i.e. the accused). "X" deposed in the proceedings as PW-4. The concerned police officer, SI Jospha reached the hospital and found other police officers present there. Statement of the victim was recorded in the presence of one Siyaram and she made endorsement over that for registration of case. The victim alleged that she had studied upto Class-III in Sant Nagar. She further alleged that on 24.09.2007, she was alone at home as she was not well and, therefore, had not gone to school. At about 09.30 AM, when she was cleaning the house, the accused entered the house and shut the door. He allegedly caught hold of her and threatened that he would kill her parents. He took-off all her clothes and allegedly committed rape on her. It was further stated that in the meanwhile, her elder sister, Suman returned and she was able to open the door as it was not fastened properly. PW-4 stated that the accused tried to run away with his clothes. She also stated that soon afterwards - five minutes later - he returned and stated that she would remember her condition before seeing anyone; poured kerosene on her and set her on fire. According to PW-5, she tried to save "X" by pouring water; the accused thereafter returned a second time and tried to save "X", along with Suman and took her to the hospital. 4. The police registered the FIR and after conducting investigations, filed chargesheet against the accused. He entered the plea of not guilty and claimed trial. Page 3 During the course of proceedings, the prosecution relied on the testimonies of 14 witnesses, including the victim, PW-4 and PW-5, her sister. After considering all the evidence, the Trial Court held that the prosecution was unable to prove the guilt of the respondent beyond reasonable doubt. 5. PW-4 – "X" is an important witness. The relevant findings of the Trial Court, particularly discussing the evidence of prosecutrix "X" reveal as follows: "XXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXX 12. PW-4 "X" is a very important witness. She is not only the victim of rape but also got burnt injuries at the hand of the accused. She deposed that on 24.09.2007 at about 09.30 AM, she was not feeling well as such she had not gone to her school. She was sweeping her house in the meanwhile, accused Munazir present in the Court came to her house. She asked him as to why he had come. He closed the door and laid her down on the bed, he put off her clothes and put a cloth in her mouth. She tried to save her but accused committed rape with her against her wish. Accused also threatened her that if she disclose this fact to anybody, he would kill her. In the meantime, her sister Suman came there and accused ran away from there and seeing her condition, her sister made a telephone call to her parents In the mean time, the accused came with a bottle containing kerosene oil and poured the same on her and told her that if she disclosed the fact to anybody, he would kill her and put her on fire. Accused also came ther