Delhi High Court
Mala vs State on 23 February, 2015
Author: S. P. Garg
$-R-61
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
DECIDED ON : 23rd FEBRUARY, 2015
+ CRL.A. 421/2005
MALA ..... Appellant
Through : None.
versus
STATE ..... Respondent
Through : Mr.Navin K.Jha, APP.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG
S.P.Garg, J. (Open Court)
1. The appellant - Mala impugns a judgment dated 29.03.2005
of learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.122/02 arising
out of FIR No.229/2002 registered under Sections
365/368/376/342/323/109/34 IPC & Sections 3, 4, 5 & 6 ITP Act at PS
Kamla Market by which she was held guilty for committing offences
under Sections 368/109/376 IPC & Sections 4 & 5 ITP Act. By an order
dated 31.03.2005, she was awarded RI for two years with fine ` 1,000/-
under Section 4 ITP Act; RI for seven years with fine ` 5,000/- under
Section 109 read with Section 376 IPC and RI for five years with fine `
1,000/- under Section 368 IPC. All the substantive sentences were to
operate concurrently.
2. Allegations against the appellant and her associates were that
they confined and concealed victims 'X', 'Y' and 'Z' at first floor of
Kotha No.70, G.B.Road, Delhi with an intention to compel or force them
to illicit intercourse. Before 24.12.2001, they had abetted the commission
of rape on the victims by sending customers; running a brothel and living
wholly or in part on their earnings and procuring these girls for
prostitution.
3. As per charge-sheet, on 22.06.2002 'X' was lodged at Nirmal
Chaya. In her statement, she implicated the appellant and her associates
for pushing her in prostitution for consideration. 'X' and 'Y' were
recovered from Kotha No.70, First floor on 24.12.2001 vide Daily Diary
(DD) No.21A under Section 13 JJ Act. They were medically examined at
JPN Hospital on 25.12.2001. 'X' was found aged around twenty years and
'Y' around nineteen years to twenty years. During investigation,
statements of the witnesses conversant with the facts were recorded. The
involvement of the appellant surfaced. She was arrested. After completion
of investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against all of them including
Neelam @ Akhtar Begum and Meena @ Nirmala. They all were duly
charged. The prosecution examined fourteen witnesses to establish their
guilt. In 313 statement, the appellant denied her involvement in the crime
and pleaded false implication. The trial resulted in her conviction as
aforesaid.
4. Crl.M.B.No.1019/05 was filed by the appellant for
suspension of sentence till the disposal of appeal. By an order dated
07.07.2006, remaining period of substantive sentence of the appellant was
suspended on her furnishing a personal bond in the sum of ` 20,000/- with
one surety in the like amount subject to deposit of fine.
5. When the process was issued for her appearance by an order
dated 26.02.2010, she could not be served and the process was received
back unexecuted. However, the record contains a report from
Superintendent Jail placed before Ms.Santosh Snehi Mann, Spl. Judge,
NDPS vide letter No.26/SCJ-6/ASW/2010/499 dated 01.11.2010 which
reveals that the appellant has already been released from jail on
03.11.2008 after she served out the sentence and paid the fine of ` 3,115/-
at jail gate. Apparently, she could not avail the benefit of suspension of
sentence and served out the sentence awarded to her.
6. None has appeared on behalf of the appellant to pursue the
appeal on merits despite her release from jail on 03.11.2008. She is not
traceable. It appears that she is not interested to prosecute the appeal as it
has become infructuous. The appeal stands disposed of as such.
7. It is, however, made clear that if the appellant appears within
a reasonable time for disposal of appeal on merits, her request will be
considered.
(S.P.GARG)
JUDGE
FEBRUARY 23, 2015 / tr
