Court No. - 45
Case :- GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. - 431 of 2018 Appellant :- State Of U.P.
Respondent :- Vijendra Pratap Singh @ Guddu Patel Counsel for Appellant :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J. Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
Heard learned A.G.A. for the State appellant/applicant and perused the material on record.
This application has been filed by the State appellant/applicant with the prayer that leave to appeal may be granted against the judgement and order dated 23.09.2017, passed in Sessions Trial No. 395 of 2014 (State vs. Vijendra Pratap Singh @ Guddu Patel), arising out of Case Crime No. 274 of 2013, under Sections 363, 366, 376, 506 I.P.C. and Section 4 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station- Utraon, District- Allahabad, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 10, Allahabad, whereby the accused respondent has been acquitted for the offence punishable under the sections referred to above.
As per the prosecution version, mother of the prosecutrix Smt. Aliya Begum lodged a report in the concerned Police Station on 9.12.2013 with regard to the missing of her daughter from her house from 1.12.2013 at around 1:00 pm. The prosecutrix was aged about 14 years and was a student of class 8th. A perusal of the record shows that prosecutrix returned back home on 11.12.2013 and thereafter on 16.12.2013 F.I.R. was lodged against the accused respondent. The prosecutrix was medically examined and according to the medical report, she was aged about 19 years. Neither any internal injury on her private part nor any external injury on her person was found and no definite opinion regarding rape was given by the doctor in the medical report. A perusal of the record further shows that the statement of prosecutrix was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. after around 27 days from the date of returning back to her home on 11.12.2013. In her testimony, she has made allegations against the accused respondent that when she had gone to attend the call of nature, she was kidnapped by the accused respondent at the point of county made pistol and took her in the car and was made unconscious by administering some intoxicant. Thereafter, she was taken to Lucknow from Allahabad and the accused respondent committed rape on her several times. It was further alleged that father of the prosecutrix brought her home on 12.12.2013 at around 4:00 am. Father of the accused respondent had threatened her with dire consequences if she would take the name of his son.
The court below after scrutinizing and analyzing the entire evidence has observed that even though the prosecutrix went on missing on 1.12.2013, still the missing report was lodged after more than 9 days and moreover, the F.I.R. was lodged on 16.12.2013 even though the prosecutrix had returned back home on 11.12.2013, as such, there was a delay of 5 days in lodging the F.I.R. There is no plausible explanation of inordinate delay in lodging the F.I.R., which creates serious doubt about the veracity of the prosecution story. The court below further observed that prosecutrix was a consenting party. She remained in the company of the accused respondent for about 11 days without raising any hue and cry.
From perusal of the record, we do not find any factual or legal error in the assessment of evidence by the court below while acquitting the accused respondent. Moreover, the view taken by the court below is a possible view. The court below has given cogent, convincing and satisfactory reasons while passing the order of acquittal.
We, therefore, do not consider it to be a fit case for grant of leave to appeal to the applicant. The application seeking leave to appeal is, accordingly, rejected and, consequently the appeal is also dismissed.
Order Date :- 27.2.2018 Atmesh