Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 281 (UTT)

State of Uttarakhand v. Faizan

2024-04-29

RAKESH THAPLIYAL, RITU BAHRI

body2024
JUDGMENT : RITU BAHRI, C.J. 1. The State has come up in appeal against the judgment passed by the Court of FTSC/ Additional Sessions Judge, Roorkee, District Haridwar in Session Trial No. 133/2022 dated 13.09.2023, whereby the respondent-Faizan, who was facing the trial for the offences punishable under Sections 457, 376(2)(n) & 506 IPC, has been acquitted. 2. As per the First Information Report, being Case Crime No. 122/2022, under Sections 457, 376(2)(n) & 506 IPC, the allegations against the accused was that the accused-Faizan, on 07/08.02.2022, at around 2 o’clock in the night, came to the house of the complainant at Rampur Daandi Raan Colony, Roorkee, District Haridwar with an intention of committing obscene acts with the wife of the complainant. It is further stated in the FIR that he forcibly had physical relations with the wife of the complainant several times, without the will and consent of the victim at the above mentioned place, and had shot obscene photos and videos from time to time, and threatened to make them viral. On the above mentioned date and time, the accused threatened to kill the complainant if caught. 3. During investigation, statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 CrPC, and before the Trial Court nine witnesses were examined by the prosecution. The Trial Court, as per the statement given by the victim, under Section 164 CrPC, found that the victim had admitted before the female Doctor that she knew the accused, and the accused used to come to her house, and the victim had accepted having physical relationship with consent. The victim is a married lady, and the complainant – Anil Kumar is her husband. 4. The victim, while appearing as PW-2, stated that Anil Kumar (complainant) is her husband, and she already knew the accused-Faizan. They had met through WhatsApp. Faizan was running a furniture shop in Bahadarabad. He came to her house and made some videos, and thereafter said that if she does not have physical relations with him, he will make the videos viral. When her husband came to know about the relationship between her and Faizan, she broke her phone, as she was threatened by the accused. On 07.02.2022, when she and her husband were sleeping at home, then at 2 o’clock in the night, the accused-Faizan came to their house by jumping over the wall. Both she, and her husband woke up. When her husband came to know about the relationship between her and Faizan, she broke her phone, as she was threatened by the accused. On 07.02.2022, when she and her husband were sleeping at home, then at 2 o’clock in the night, the accused-Faizan came to their house by jumping over the wall. Both she, and her husband woke up. There was a fight between the accused and her husband, and the accused strangulated her husband. Hearing the noise, nearby people gathered, and everybody caught the accused. The accused was beaten up by the people present there, and the police was called. Thereafter, the victim was taken by the police for medical examination on 11.02.2022. Thereafter, the victim was medically examined by the female Doctor, but she did not get her internal examination done. Thereafter, her statement, under Section 164 CrPC, was recorded. The statement is Exhibit P-1/PW-2, in which she identified her signatures. 5. In her cross-examination, she stated that she knew Faizan since 2019. She used to talk to the accused through her father’s phone, and she was in love with the accused before. She had been in a relationship with the accused for one year, about which her husband came to know. My husband had beaten me. First, I myself had called the accused to my house ,and later he himself used to come. The accused came to my house 05-06 times. I did not tell my husband about the accused; he himself came to know about it through some medium. The accused came without my consent from 2020 to 2021. I did not complain to anyone about the visiting of the accused. My mother-in-law and my father-in-law live on the first floor of the house where I live. There are three rooms on the ground floor. I have a boy, whose age is 05 years. My room is at the end, and the accused used to come to my room after coming from the drawing room, and used to sit and talk. He used to come in the afternoon, when my husband is not at home. First of all my mother-in-law and father-in-law came. Shakti and Sonu from nearby had come and people also came, whose names are not known, about 5-20 people had come. My husband was rescued from the accused by Shakti and Sonu. We called the police. He used to come in the afternoon, when my husband is not at home. First of all my mother-in-law and father-in-law came. Shakti and Sonu from nearby had come and people also came, whose names are not known, about 5-20 people had come. My husband was rescued from the accused by Shakti and Sonu. We called the police. After calling the police, the police came. We kept Faizan at my house, and from there the police took him away. A complaint was written in the police station. The complaint was written in the police station by Preeti Tomar, who is from the police department. My husband did not ask me before lodging the complaint, and I was sitting outside at that time. I had not read the complaint. I did not go to the house of accused Faizan with him. I came the next day. I had come to my parents’ house. Shri Ram Singh and Smt. Sureshana are my father-in-law and mother-in-law. Ashwani is my real brother. There were no injury marks on my body. It is wrong to say that on 07.02.2022, I personally called the accused over phone, and I let him being caught by my husband and the people of the locality and handed over to the police. Preeti Tomar had interrogated me. The accused - Faizan is younger than me. 6. As per the husband of the victim, who appeared as PW-3, on 07.02.2022, the accused came to his house, and was trying to molest his wife. He called his parents, and the accused strangulated him. His parents came from the first floor, and even the nearby people came and saved him, and the accused abused and threatened to kill him. When the accused tried to run away, people nearby beat him up, and thereafter police was informed. 7. In his cross-examination by the accused, the complainant admitted that he came to know about the relationship between the accused and his wife, and he reported his wife’s displeasure at the police station, and at that time the victim and Faizan’s family came to the police station. They accepted their mistake, and they said that they will not make such a mistake in future. Thereafter, they had a written compromise in the police station, and then he came back home with the victim-wife. 8. Even before Dr. They accepted their mistake, and they said that they will not make such a mistake in future. Thereafter, they had a written compromise in the police station, and then he came back home with the victim-wife. 8. Even before Dr. Humaira - PW-4, the victim had admitted that she knew the accused-Faizan since November, 2019. However, in June, 2021 she stopped taking to the accused, and according to the victim, she had a physical relationship with the accused Faizan, and thereafter, he started blackmailing her. However, in the cross-examination, the Doctor stated that no evidence was shown, with regard to photograph or video with regard to blackmailing. 9. As per the prosecution witness PW-5 - Dr. Vandana Bhardwaj, there was no sign of any injury on the body of the complainant - Anil Kumar. There was no mark on the neck either. The evidence given by PW-1 Constable-1280 Chetan, PW-7 Constable-67 Rakesh Dimri, PW-8 Sub-Inspector Preeti Tomar and P.W.9 Sub-Inspector Vishaka Aswal was with regard to the investigation carried out. 10. After going through the entire evidence, the Trial Court has acquitted the accused, keeping in view the statement given by the prosecutrix, under Section 164 CrPC, where she had admitted to the female Doctor that she knew the accused, and he used to come to her house, and accepted having physical relationship with consent. Even the husband of the victim had accepted the fact that when he came to know about the relationship of the victim with the accused, they both had accepted their mistake, and the husband of the victim has accepted this fact in his cross-examination. 11. During the entire investigation, no material/ video clip was found by the Investigating Officer, which could prove that the accused had given any threat to the victim to make the video viral. As per the medical examination of the husband of the victim, there was no injury found on his body. Hence, the version given by the victim’s husband that Faizan had strangulated him was found to be false. The victim did not get her internal examination done during medical examination. 12. As per the medical examination of the husband of the victim, there was no injury found on his body. Hence, the version given by the victim’s husband that Faizan had strangulated him was found to be false. The victim did not get her internal examination done during medical examination. 12. The Trial Court had referred to the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Narender Kumar v. State (N.C.T. of Delhi), 2012 (2) DNR 748 (SC) and Deepak Gulati v. State of Haryana, (2013) 82 ACRC 345 (SC) on the preposition that the prosecution has to lead evidence to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and if there is physical relationship between the parties, with the consent of the prosecutrix, and no complaint was raised by her at any time, then the accused has to be extended the benefit of doubt. 13. In the facts of the present case, the victim had admitted that she was in relationship with the accused since November, 2019, and it was in 2021, he threatened her. In June, 2019, she stopped talking to the accused Faizan. It was further admitted even by the husband of the victim that both victim and the accused were in relationship, and they had accepted their mistake, and assured not to make such a mistake in future. Hence, the victim, being a major married lady, was in relationship with the accused with consent, and there was no evidence led to show that there was any video or photograph to blackmail the victim. Even in the present case, there was no injury on the body of the victim’s husband, and as per the allegations leveled by him, the accused-Faizan had strangulated him and beaten him. Rather, in paragraph no. 53 of the impugned judgment, the details of the injuries on the body of the accused have been given, which are 13 in number. Hence, it was the accused, who was given beating, and there was no injury on the body of the husband of the victim. 14. Hence, the benefit of doubt has been correctly given to the accused, and the judgment of acquittal has been correctly based by appreciating the evidence in the right perspective. The impugned judgment of acquittal does not require any interference. 15. The present Special Leave to Appeal, as well as the Government Appeal are, hereby, dismissed. 16. 14. Hence, the benefit of doubt has been correctly given to the accused, and the judgment of acquittal has been correctly based by appreciating the evidence in the right perspective. The impugned judgment of acquittal does not require any interference. 15. The present Special Leave to Appeal, as well as the Government Appeal are, hereby, dismissed. 16. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.