Gautam vs State
2018 Latest Caselaw 3605 Del

*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%                                           Decided on: 3rd July, 2018
+                   CRL.A. 1119/2017
       GAUTAM                                             ..... Appellant
                          Represented by:     Ms. Saahila Lamba, Advocate.
                          versus
       STATE                                             ..... Respondent
                          Represented by:     Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP with
                                              SI Ramesh Kumar, PS Sultan
                                              Puri.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

MUKTA GUPTA, J. (ORAL)

Crl.M.A. No. 20105/2017 (Delay) For the reason stated in the application delay of six days in filing the appeal is condoned.

Application is disposed of.

CRL.A. 1119/2017

1. Admit.

2. By the impugned judgment dated 13th September, 2017 Gautam has been convicted for offences punishable under Section 376 IPC and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and vide the order dated 16th September, 2017 awarded sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a period of 12 years and to pay a fine of ₹20,000/- in default whereof to undergo further imprisonment for a period of three months under Section 6 of the POCSO Act.

3. Investigation in the matter was instituted on receipt of DD No. 48A at PS Sultanpuri. On reaching the spot the mother of the minor girl aged 7 years that is the child victim disclosed that the appellant had committed penetrative sexual assault on the child.

4. On the basis of the statement of the mother of the child FIR No. 326/2013 was registered. During the course of investigation medical examination of the child was conducted firstly by Dr. Binay Kumar, PW-9 and thereafter detailed gynaecological examination by Dr. Aditi Aggarwal PW-17.

5. As per the MLC Ex. PW-9/A, Dr. Aditi Aggarwal further opined "hymen fresh torn present, congestion present around hymen". The sample collected from the child and the appellant were also sent for DNA analysis and the report there of was exhibited as Ex. PW-15/C and Ex. PW-15/C-1.

6. Statement of the child victim whose age was proved to be 8 years as her date of birth was 8th December, 2004 was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. According to the child victim, when she was playing with the children in the park, the appellant who was residing near her house took her to a separate place on the pretext of getting her something and committed wrong act with her.

7. Besides the child victim, the prosecution also examined, Sunil, PW- 11, who was working as a chowkidar/safai karamchari at the sulabh shochalaya on the relevant date and time. Sunil, deposed that on 28 th May, 2013 at about 4:30/4:45 PM on hearing some noise from the backside of sulabh shochalaya, he went there and saw the appellant along with the girl child of tender age and that time zip of the appellant's pant was open and on seeing, Sunil, he tried to run away but he was apprehended. Thereafter, he

called the parents of the child victim through his son and after arrival the father of the child victim made a call at 100 number where after the police arrived.

8. Considering the testimony of the child victim, Sunil, parents of the child victim, medical evidence and the MLC and that the appellant was apprehended at the spot itself this Court finds no reason to interfere with the judgment of conviction and order on sentence.

9. Appeal is dismissed. Copy of this order be conveyed to Superintendent Central Jail, Tihar for information to the appellant and updation of the records.

Crl.M.B. No. 2167/2017 Application is dismissed as infructuous.

(MUKTA GUPTA) JUDGE JULY 03, 2018 'yo'