Ram Bhool vs State Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi
2014 Latest Caselaw 1028 Del

$~7
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                                         Date of decision: February 25, 2014
+     CRL.REV.P. 348/2012
      RAM BHOOL                                                      ..... Petitioner
                                Through Mr.L.D.Mual with Mr.P.S.Ranga
                                & Mr.Yoginder, Advocates

                                versus

      STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI               ..... Respondent
                   Through Mr.Pramod Saxena, APP

      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL

      VEENA BIRBAL, J.

1. The present revision petition is directed against the order dated 9th February, 2012 passed by Ld.Addl. Sessions Judge, Delhi in CA No.08/2011 whereby the judgment dated 25.8.2011 and order of sentence dated 27.8.2011 passed by the ld.ACMM in case FIR no.245/2000, P.S. Shahdara u/s 377/342 IPC, has been upheld.

2. The ld.ACMM vide judgment dated 25.8.2011 has convicted the petitioner for the offence punishable u/s 377/342 IPC and vide order dated 27.8.2011 sentenced him to undergo RI for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- for offence u/s 342 IPC and in default to undergo SI for three months. Ld.ACMM further sentenced the appellant to undergo RI for a period of three years u/s 377 IPC and a fine of Rs.10000/- which shall be payable to the victim as

compensation. It is further ordered that in case of default of payment of fine, same shall be recovered from him as arrears of land revenue.

3. The case of the prosecution against the petitioner is that on 5.9.2000 at about 11.30 pm at Azad Chowk, Gali No.11, Video Game Parlour, Kardam Puri, Delhi, petitioner-Ram Bhool had committed an offence by wrongfully confining one boy, namely, Mohsin aged about 12 years and with whom he had committed carnal intercourse which was against the order of nature. The petitioner was booked u/s 342/377 IPC vide FIR no.245/2000. After registration of FIR, he was arrested but later on released on bail. The statement of victim was recorded. He was also medically examined and after completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed before the concerned court and the petitioner was charged for committing offence u/s 342/377 IPC.

4. In all, prosecution has examined six witnesses i.e., Mohsin, PW-1, complainant who was star witness of the occurrence, his mother Smt.Rajia, PW-2, Head Constable Radhesh Kumar, PW-3 who had registered the FIR, Sh.Naresh Kumar, PW-4 who had proved on record Ex.PW 4/A and PW 4/B and Dr.Banarsi Dass, PW-5 who had proved the MLC of the petitioner Ex.PW 5/A to the effect that petitioner was able to perform sexual intercourse. In statement u/s 313 Cr.P.C, petitioner had pleaded not guilty and stated that he was an innocent person and was falsely implicated in the case. However, no evidence was led in defence. The ld.ACMM vide judgment dated 25th August, 2011 held him guilty for the offence u/s 377/342 IPC and sentenced him vide order dated 27.8.2000, as is stated above.

5. Against the said judgment/order, a challenge was made by way

of Crl.Appeal no.08/2011 before the ld.Addl. Sessions Judge which has been upheld vide impugned judgment.

6. Aggrieved with the same, present petition is filed.

7. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner, under instructions of the petitioner, submitted that petitioner is not challenging the findings of the two courts below by which he has been held guilty for the offence u/s 377/342 IPC. However, it is submitted that a lenient view may be taken and the petitioner be released on sentence already undergone by him.

8. It is stated that petitioner has been sentenced to undergo RI for a period of one year and also to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- for offence u/s 342 IPC and further sentenced to undergo RI for a period of three years u/s 377 IPC and a fine of Rs.10000/- which has been ordered to be given to the victim as compensation. It is stated that fine amount has already been deposited by the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that petitioner is ready to pay more compensation amount to the petitioner. It is further submitted that petitioner has already undergone sentence of 2 years and 8 months including remissions earned. It is stated that alleged occurrence took place in the year 2000 and the petitioner has faced agony of trial including the present proceedings for the past 14 years. He is presently 46 years of age and having a family to support. Learned counsel has prayed that petitioner be released on sentence already undergone by him.

9. In the present case, both ld.ACMM and the ld.Addl. Sessions Judge have appreciated the evidence and both have held that prosecution has successfully proved its case beyond any reasonable

doubt. There is evidence of victim PW-1 on record which describes in detail as to how petitioner had committed carnal intercourse with him which is supported with medical evidence i.e., MLC of victim Mohsin Ex.PW 6/A. There is no perversity in the findings of the courts below in holding the petitioner guilty of the alleged occurrence. In view of the evidence on record, the conviction of the petitioner u/s 377/342 IPC is confirmed.

10. The nominal roll dated 5th February, 2014 shows that petitioner has already undergone sentence of two years, seven months and twenty days including remissions earned. The nominal roll shows that his conduct in jail is satisfactory and nothing is reported against him regarding his involvement in any other illegal or criminal activity. Even at the time of conviction, his antecedents were verified and it was found that he was not involved in any other criminal activity except the present case. The ld.APP has no objection in taking a lenient view and to modify the sentence order.

11. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the sentence of the petitioner is modified to the sentence already undergone by him. Petitioner shall pay a compensation of Rs.25,000/- to the victim PW-1 and he shall deposit the said amount by way of demand draft in the name of the victim before the ld.trial court within 15 days. The trial court shall issue notice to the victim PW-1 for release of compensation amount in his favour. In addition, the compensation amount which has already been deposited by the petitioner and was ordered to be released to the victim PW-1 be also released if the same is not released earlier.

Petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

A copy of this order be sent to the petitioner through the concerned Jail Superintendent.

VEENA BIRBAL, J FEBRUARY 25, 2014 ssb