Delhi High Court
Ravi Nagar @ Ravinder vs State on 14 May, 2015
Author: S. P. Garg
$-11
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
DECIDED ON : 14th MAY, 2015
+ CRL.A.No.922/2011 & CRL.M.A.No.196/2015
RAVI NAGAR @ RAVINDER ..... Appellant
Through : Mr.Ankur Sood, Advocate with
Mr.Shoumendu Mukherji,
Advocate.
versus
STATE ..... Respondent
Through : Ms.Kusum Dhalla, APP.
SI Vivek Sharma, PS Gokalpuri.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG
S.P.Garg, J. (Oral)
1. The appellant - Ravi Nagar @ Ravinder impugns a judgment
dated 09.06.2011 of learned Addl. Sessions Judge in Sessions Case
No.58/10 arising out of FIR No.47/2010 under Sections 363/366/376 IPC
registered at Police Station Gokalpuri by which he was held guilty for
committing offences under Sections 363/366/376 IPC. By an order dated
04.07.2011, he was awarded various prison terms with fine.
2. Allegations against the appellant as reflected in the charge-
sheet were that on 11.02.2010 at about 07.15 p.m. near Bus Stand, B-
Block, Delhi, he kidnapped 'X' (assumed name) aged 17 years from
lawful guardianship of her uncle Shakir Ali and thereafter committed rape
upon her in between 11.02.2010 and 24.02.2010 at different places. FIR
was registered under Section 363 IPC on getting missing person report.
During investigation, the appellant was apprehended and arrested. 'X' was
recovered; she recorded her 164 Cr.P.C. statement. She was medically
examined. Statements of witnesses conversant with the facts were
recorded. Exhibits were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory for
examination. After completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was filed
against the appellant. The prosecution examined 16 witnesses to prove its
case. In 313 statement, the appellant denied his involvement in the crime
and pleaded false implication. The appellant examined two witnesses
DW-1 (Satish) and DW-2 (Veer Singh) in defence. The trial resulted in
his conviction as aforesaid. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, the
appellant has preferred the instant appeal.
3. During the course of arguments, Crl.M.A.No.196/2015 under
Section 7-A of the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act,
2000 was filed by the appellant claiming juvenility on the day of incident.
In response to notice, State filed status report. By an order dated
12.02.2015, the parties were directed to appear before the Trial Court on
24.02.2015. The Trial Court was directed to record findings regarding the
juvenility of the appellant on the day of occurrence and submit its report.
Report dated 20.04.2015 has been received from the Trial Court. As per
enquiry conducted by the Court of Sh.Rakesh Siddhartha, District &
Sessions Judge (NE), Karkardooma Courts, Delhi, age of the appellant has
been ascertained as 17 years, 10 months and 17 days on the day of
occurrence. The enquiry report has not been challenged by the State.
Apparently, on the day of incident, the appellant was below 18 years of
age and was juvenile.
4. Considering the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in 'Mohan Mali & Anr. vs. State of Madhya Pradesh', (2010) 6 SCC 669,
in para 12,13 and 14 and having regard to the fact that the appellant -
Ravi Nagar @ Ravinder was minor on the date of commission of offence
and has already undergone more than the maximum sentence provided
under Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children)
Act, 2000, by applying the provisions of Rule 98 of the Juvenile Justice
(Care & Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 read with Section 15 and 64
of the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2000, appeal
filed by the appellant is allowed. Pending application also stands disposed
of. The appellant be released forthwith if not required to be detained in
any other criminal case.
5. Trial Court record along with a copy of this order be sent
back forthwith. A copy of the order be sent to Jail Superintendent, Tihar
Jail for intimation.
(S.P.GARG)
JUDGE
MAY 14, 2015 / tr
