IntheCourtofMs.

KaveriBaweja
AdditionalSessionsJudgeSpecialFTC2(Central)
TisHazariCourts:Delhi.
SessionsCaseNo.:52/2014
UniqueIDNo.:02401R0659852013
State

versusHarishSharma
S/oSh.YadramSharma
R/o3C422,BudhiVihar,
Muradabad,UP.

Casearisingoutof:
FIRNo.

216/2012

PoliceStation

DBGRoad

UnderSection

376IPC

Judgmentreservedon

:12.10.2015

Judgmentpronouncedon

:31.10.2015
JUDGMENT

PROSECUTIONCASE:
1.

It is the case of Prosecution that on 25.05.2012, complainant

'P.D.'(namewithheldinordertoprotectheridentity)cametoPSDBGRoad
andgavestatementtoASIPushpaallegingcommissionofrapebyaccused
HarishSharma. Atthesametime,shealsogaveinwritingthatasshehad

alsogivenacomplaintagainstaccusedatMahilaThanaatRaipur,wherethe
matter is pending consideration, she does not want any action against the
accusedforonemonthas.However,on26.09.2012,sheagaincametothePS
DBGRoadandgotlodgedacaseFIRagainsttheaccusedHarishSharmaon
thebasisofhercomplaintdated25.05.2012,thecontentswhereofarebeing
enumeratedasunder:
2.

Thecomplainant'P.D.'isaresidentofRaipur.About1year

back,shecreatedaprofileonthewebsitejeewansathi.comformatrimonial
purpose and found the details of one Harish Sharma, which she liked.
Thereafter,shesentaproposalformarriagetohimandalsodisclosedher
entirepersonaldetailstohim.Accusedacceptedherproposalformarriage
throughhismobilephonesviz.,9759684740&9990111593andremainedin
touch with her for 1 year on the pretext of marriage and gained her
confidence.
3.

The complainant further stated in her complaint that on

14.12.2011, accused calledher to Delhi to meet his family members. She

reachedDelhibytrainon14.12.2011 intheevening and accusedcameto

HazratNizammudinRailwayStationtopickheratabout6:30PMandinstead
oftakinghertohishouse,hetookhertoahotelnamelyOrchidGardenat
DBGRoad,KarolBagh,Delhi.Uponaskingofcomplainantastowhyhehas
broughthertoahotel,accusedtoldherthathisfamilymemberswillcome
aftertwodaystomeetherandthathewillintroducehertotheminthesame
hotel. ThecomplainantbeingunknowntoDelhicity,hadnooption,butto
stayinthesaidhotel.
4.

Thecomplainantfurtherallegedinhercomplaintthataccused

hadestablishedphysicalrelationswithheragainstherwishesintheaforesaid
hotelonthepretextofmarriage.Duetofearofdefamationinsociety,shedid
notdiscloseanyoneaboutthisincident.FamilymembersofAccusedalsodid
notcometomeether.AccusedaskedhertoreturntoherhouseatRaipurand
assuredherthathewillcometherealongwithhisfamilytotalkabouttheir
marriage.However,accuseddidnotturnupforthesame. Thereafter,the
complainant also found that the Accused had closed his profile on
jeewansathi.comandhadalsoswitchedoffhismobilenumbers.Complainant
alsomadeseveraleffortsforcallingtheaccusedatMahilaThanaatRaipur,

but the accused did not turn up there. Thereafter, the complainant was
constrainedtolodgeacomplaintagainsttheaccusedatPSDBGRoad.
5.

During the course of investigation, Complainant was got

medically examined vide MLC No.15060 from LNJP Hospital and the
exhibitscollected from the hospital were taken into police possession and
weredepositedintheMalkhanathereafter. Searchwasalsomadeforthe
AccusedHarishSharmaathisofficeatMoradabadaswellashishouseat
Amroha. Thereafter, Accused got Anticipatory Bail from the court on
26.10.2015. However, he was formally arrested on 28.10.2015 and was
joinedininvestigationandhismedicalwasalsogotconductedantheexhibits
werealsocollectedfromthehospital.
6.

PolicealsomadefromthestaffofHotelOrchidGarden,DBG

Road,Delhi.Statementofwitnesseswerealsorecordedduringinvestigation,
exhibitsweresenttoFSLforopinionandaftercompletionofinvestigation,
chargesheetwasfiledbeforethecourt.
CHARGES:
7.

Upon committal of the case and on the basis of material on

record, Accused Harish Sharma S/o Sh.Yadram Sharma was charged for
offence punishable under Sections 376 IPC vide order dated 05.08.2014.
Accusedpleadednotguiltyandclaimedtrialwhenthechargewasreadover
andexplainedtohim.
PROSECUTIONWITNESSES:
8.

Prosecutionexamined15witnessesinallinordertoproveitscase

whichmaybecategorizedasunder:
(i)

PublicWitnesses:

9.

Prosecutrix'PD'wasexaminedasPW1. Hertestimonywould

bediscussedlaterinthecourseofthejudgmentinordertoavoidrepetition
andforthesakeofbrevity.
10.

PW3Sh.PranavMahajan,Manager(Legal),InfoEdge(India)

Ltd.deposedthatjeevansathi.comisawebsitewhichisownedandoperated
by Info Edge (India) Ltd. He further deposed that on 27.09.2013, upon
receiptofnoticeunderSection91Cr.PCfromSISangeeta(Ex.PW3/A),he
submitted the requisite information vide his lettercumcertificate under
section 65B Evidence Act dated 30.09.2013 and proved the same as

Ex.PW3/B.
11.

Sh.Sanjay Gupta, Manager of Hotel Orchid Garden was

examinedasPW5. HeidentifiedentryNo.4308dated14.12.2011madein
theHotelRegisteranddeposed thatasperthesaidentry atSrl.No.4308,
Accused Harish Sharma and Prosecutrix 'PD' checked into their hotel on
14.12.2011atabout6PMandcheckedouton16.11.2011at7:45AMand
thatRoomNo.208wasallottedtothem. Healsodeposedthatthecopyof
drivinglicenceofAccusedHarishSharmawastakenatthetimeofallotting
the said room to them as identity proof as per the aforesaid entry in the
register.HealsoprovedphotocopyofthesaidentryasMarkPW5/A.
12.

PW6 Sh.D.R.Sarna, Chief Ticket Inspector, Nizamuddin

RailwayStation,Delhideposedregardinghandingoverofthecertifiedcopy
of Railway Chart for 28.07.2012 with respect to train No.12807 Samta
ExpresstoonepoliceofficialinthemonthofSeptember,2013andprovedthe
sameasEx.PW6/A.Hefurtherdeposedthatthesaidcertifiedcopyhadbeen
prepared from the original records which is submitted by the TT of the
concernedtrainattheirrailwaystationuponterminationofjourney.Healso

provedthecertificategivenbyhiminthisregardasEx.PW6/B.
13.

PW7Sh.ManoharLalwasexaminedinordertoprovetheGuest

EntryRegister,CCTVfootageanddocumentspertainingtostayofAccused
andProsecutrix inhotelOrchidGarden,DBGRoad,Delhifortheperiod
14.12.2011to16.12.2011.Thiswitnessalsoprovedtheoriginalguestentry
register which was seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW7/A and the
photocopiesoftheentrybearingNo.4308dated14.12.2011atpage50ofthe
registeralongwithdocumentsfurnishedbyAccusedHarishSharmaandother
documentsasEx.PW7/P2(Colly)(runninginto08pages.).
14.

PW8 Sh.Javed Akhtar, who is working in IDBI

Bank,Muradabad Branch as Assistant Manager produced the summoned

recordi.e.OriginalattendanceregisteroftheirbranchfortheperiodJanuary,
2012 till June, 2013 and proved the attendance sheets for the months of
September, 2012 and October, 2012 as Ex.PW8/A and Ex.PW8/B
respectively. He further deposed regarding the attestation of the said
attendance sheets by their Branch Manager Sh.Shehbaz Imam and also
identifiedhissignaturesashehadseenhimwritingandsigningintheregular

courseofhisdutyinthebank.
Doctors:
15.

PW4isDr.Neelima,whopreparedtheMLC(Ex.PW4/A)ofthe

Prosecutrixon26.09.2012onthebasisofallegedhistorygivenbyher.This
witnessfurtherdeposedthattheProsecutrixagaincametothehospitalonthe
intervening night of 2627.11.2012 and she examined the Prosecutrix after
obtainingherconsent. PW4alsoprovedherdetailedasEx.PW4/Bonthe
backsideofMLCEx.PW4/A,bearinghersignaturesatpointA.Shecollected
someexhibits,sealedwiththesealofhospitalandhandedoverthesametothe
accompanyingpoliceofficials.
Policeofficials:
16.

RemainingwitnessespertaintoinvestigationwhichincludeDuty

OfficerHCBrijpalSingh,whowasexaminedasPW2.Hedeposedregarding
recordingoftheFIRon26.09.2012andprovedthecomputerizedcopyofthe
same as Ex.PW2/A and his subsequent endorsement on the same as
Ex.PW2/B.
17.

W/SI Pushpa was examined as PW13. She deposed that on

25.05.2012 while she was posted at PS DBG Road, the complaint of the
Prosecutrix was assigned to her and she made inquiries from her. The
ProsecutrixtroldherthatshehadalsofiledacomplaintagainsttheAccused
HarishKumarinMahilaPSRaipur,ChhatisgarhandsheaskedW/SIPushpa
forkeepinghercomplaintpendingforonemonthasthenextdateofhearingof
hersaidcomplaintwas04.06.2012.
18.

PW13 further deposed that on 26.09.2012, Prosecutrix again

cameinthePSandrequestedtotakeactiononhercompliantwhichwasgiven
byherinPSDBGRoadon25.05.2012.PW13preparedtherukkaonthesaid
complaintvideEx.PW13/AandgotregisteredtheFIR.Afterregistrationof
theFIR,investigationofthiscasewasassignedtoW/SIR.P.MinzandPW13
handedoveralltherelevantdocumentstoW/SIR.P.Minz.
19.

Ct.LalChandwasexaminedasPW14. Hedeposedregarding

handingoverofrukkaandcopyofFIRtoW/SIR.P.Minzforinvestigationon
26.09.2012.
20.

PW15isH/Ct.RajDulariwho along withIO/WSI R.P.Minz

took the Prosecutrix to LHMC hospital on 26.09.2012 for her medical

examination.Shefurtherdeposedthattheexaminingdoctorhandedoversome
sealedexhibitstoherwhichshehandedovertotheIO,wholaterseizedthe
samevideseizurememoEx.PW10/A.
21.

Insp.R.P.MinzsteppedintowitnessboxasPW10.Shedeposed

thaton26.09.2012,investigationofthiscasewasassignedtoher.ASIPushpa
handed over all the relevant documents to her. PW10 got the Prosecutrix
medically examined at LHMC hospital and collected the MLC and sealed
exhibits of Prosecutrix from HC Raj Dulari, which were given to her by
examining doctor and seized the same vide seizure memo Ex.PW10/A.
PW10 also prepared the site plan of hotel Orchid Garden, DBG Road
(Ex.PW1/PA)anddepositedtheexhibitsinthemalkhanaandrecorded the
statementofwitnesses.ShealsosearchedfortheaccusedatMuradabadalong
withpolicestaffbuthecouldnotbefoundthere.PW10lastlydeposedthat
on05.10.2012,shedepositedthecasefilewithMHC(R)ofPSDBGRoadas
theinvestigationwastransferredtosomeotherofficer.
22.

MHCMHCAjaywasexaminedasPW11.Hedeposedregarding

depositofsealedexhibitsduring thecourseofinvestigationon 27.09.2012,

28.10.2012,02.11.2012&31.10.2012andprovedtheirentriesmadebyhimin
the Register No.19 as Ex.PW11/A, Ex.PW11/B, Ex.PW11/C and
Ex.PW11/Drespectively.
23.

Ct.PradeepBishtwasexaminedasPW12.Hedeposedregarding

takingofsealedexhibitsvideRCNo.51/21/12fromMalkhanaon022.11.2012
onthedirectionsoftheIOanddepositingofthesameinFSLRohini. He
furtherdeposedregardinghandingoverthecopyofRCandacknowledgment
toMHC(M).
24.

PW9 is IO/WSI Sangeeta to whom further investigation was

assignedon26.10.2012.ShearrestedtheAccuseduponhissurrenderinthePS
on28.10.2012videarrestmemoEx.PW9/Aandalsoconductedhispersonal
search memo Ex.PW9/B. As the Accused was on anticipatory bail, she
releasedhimafterformalarrest.ShealsogottheAccusedmedicalexamined
videMLCEx.PW9/Candalsogotconductedhispotencytest.
25.

PW9 also prepared the seizure memos of the various articles

whichsheseizedduringthecourseofinvestigation,recordedthestatementof
witnessespendingFSLresult,completedtheinvestigation,preparedthecharge

sheetandfiledthesameinthecourt.
26.

PW9 further deposed regarding collection of FSL result i.e.

Biological Examination (Ex.,PW9/G) and Handwriting Expert Report

(Ex.PW9/H)andfiledthesamebeforethecourt.
STATEMENTOFACCUSEDUNDERSECTION313Cr.P.C.:
27.

In his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.PC, Accused

HarishSharmapleadedinnocenceandhisfalseimplicationinthiscase.He
statedthatProsecutrixinfactblackmailedhiminordertoextractmoneyfrom
himandonhisrefusaltodoso,shegotthisfalsecaseregisteredagainsthim.
He further stated that he never established physical relations with the
Prosecutrixatanypointoftime. Accuseddidnotleadanyevidenceinhis
defence.
ARGUMENTS,ANALYSISANDFINDINGS:
28

I have heard detailed arguments advanced by learned defence

counselandlearnedAddl.PPfortheStateandhavealsogonethrough the
writtensubmissionsfiledbythedefenceandtherelevantcaselawcitedinthe
courseofarguments.

29.

OntheonehandlearnedAddl.PPsubmittedthatitisestablishedby

thetestimony of theProsecutrix 'PD'that theaccused established physical

relationswithheraftergivingherassuranceofmarriageandtherebyobtained
herconsentforphysicalrelationsbykeepingherundermisconceptionoffact
and thus committed rape upon her. On the other hand, learned defence
counselsubmittedthattheProsecutionhasfailedtoprovethechargesagainst
theaccused.
30.

Itwassubmittedbylearneddefencecounselthattheentirecaseof

theProsecutionisfalseandthere isan unexplained delay ofmore than 9

monthsintheregistrationoftheFIR. Moreover,eventhecomplaintdated
25.05.2012onwhichtheFIRwassubsequentlyregisteredwasalsomadeby
theProsecutrixafterthelapseofmorethan05monthsfromthedateofthe
allegedincident.Further,shealsorequestedthepoliceofficialsnottotakeany
actionagainsttheaccusedtillherfurtherinstructionsandasperthecharge
sheet,shedidnotrespondtill26.09.2012despitebesteffortsbythepolice.
31.

It was further submitted by learned defence counsel that the

Prosecutrixhasmademutuallycontradictoryallegationsagainsttheaccused

by allegingontheonehand thattheaccused forcibly established physical

relationswithherduringtheperiodfrom14.12.2011to15.12.2011andonthe
otherhandsheclaimedthattheaccusedestablishedphysicalrelationswithher
on the promise of marriage. It was contended that these mutually
contradictoryclaimsoftheProsecutrixaresufficienttodemolishtheentire
caseoftheProsecution.
32.

ItwasfurthersubmittedthattheProsecutrixisaneducatedgirl

agedabout35yearsandsheenteredintophysicalrelationswiththeaccused,
apparently,withherconsentandknowingfullytheconsequencesofheract.
Learned defence counselthussubmitted that thephysical relations,ifany,
establishedbetweenaccusedandtheProsecutrixwereconsensualinnature
andbynostretchofimaginationcanbetermed asrape,asallegedbythe
Prosecutrix.Itisthusallegedthattheaccuseddeservestobeacquittedforthe
allegedoffenceunderSection376IPCasthesaidallegationshavenotbeen
provedagainsthim.
33.

Forappreciatingandanalyzingtherivalsubmissionsduringthe

course of arguments, it is necessary to deal with the testimony of

Prosecutrix/PW1'PD',whoisthemostmaterialwitnessofProsecution.
34.

Prosecutrix/PW1 deposed that she is post graduate and has

completedherM.Comandherdateofbirthis29.05.1980. Shecreatedher
profile on jeewansathi.com sometime in the year 2010 and uploaded the
profileofaccusedHarishSharma,whichshelikedandshesentarequestto
himonthewebsite. Thereafter,Accused contactedhertelephonicallyand
theystartedinteractingwitheachotherandremainedintouchforabout1
year.
35.

On14.12.2011,accusedaskedhertocometoDelhitomeethis

familymembers.ShereachedDelhibytrainintheeveningof14.12.2011and
AccusedtookherinaTSRtoahotelnamelyOrchidGardenatDBGRoad
fromHazratNizammuddinRailwayStation.Shefurtherdeposedthataccused
askedhernottosayanythingbeforethehotelManager.Hemadeanentryin
thehotelregisterandtookaroom in thathoteland introduced her as his
fiancee.WhensheinquiredfromtheAccusedastowhyhehasbroughther
there,hetoldherthathisfamilymemberswillcomeaftertwodaystomeet
herandthathewillintroducehertotheminthesamehotel.

36.

Prosecutrix/PW1furtherdeposedthatAccusedmadeherstayin

thehotelfortwodaysandduringthisperiodheestablishedphysicalrelations
withoutherconsentanddespiteherrefusalseveraltimes.Whenshetriedto
object,Accusedusetogiveherassurancethathewillmarryherandthathis
familyisalsocomingtomeetherforthepurposeoftheirmarriage.
37.

Aftertwodays,Accusedtoldherthathismotherhassuddenly

fallenillandthathewillhavetogotohishouse.Healsoaskedhertoreturn
toherhouseatRaipurandassuredherthathewillcometherealongwithhis
familytotalkabouttheirmarriage.
38.

PW1alsodeposedthatthereafterwhenshetriedtocallupthe

accused,hedidnottakehercallsnorrepliedtohermessages. Finally,she
contactedoneAdvocatenamelyMr.YuvrajSingh,whocalledtheaccusedon
28.02.2012,butAccusedflatlytoldhimthathedoesnotknowany'P.D'.She
furtherdeposedthattheaccusedfinallytalkedtoherandaskedhertogive
himonemonth'stime,buthedidnotcontacther. Finally,sheapproached
MahilaThanaatRaipur,wherethematterwasreferredtoMediationCentre
(PaarivarikParamarshKendra),butAccuseddidnotappeardespiteserviceof

notice for four dates. Thereafter, she got the case registered against the
Accusedonthebasisofhercomplaintdated25.05.2012(Ex.PW1/A).
39.

PW1alsodeposedthatshehandedovertheclotheswhichshe

waswearingatthetimeoftheincidenttothepoliceduring thecourseof
investigation in the month of October, 2012 and they were seized by the
police vide seizure memo Ex.PW1/B. She also handed over 06 railway
ticketsofherjourneytoandfrofromRaipurtoDelhiwhichwereseizedvide
seizurememoEx.PW1/C.Prosecutrix/PW1correctlyidentifiedtheclothes
whichshehadgiventothepolicewhenthesamewereproducedandshownto
herinthecourt.
40.

OnthebasisoftheaforesaidtestimonyoftheProsecutrixand

otherevidenceledonrecordinthecourseoftrial,includingtheguestentry
register of Hotel Orchid Garden, DBG Road, Delhi produced by PW7
Sh.ManoharLal,whichhasbeenestablishedonrecordbytheProsecutionthat
theAccusedandtheProsecutrixstayedinhotelOrchidGardenatDBGRoad,
Delhifrom14.12.2011tillthemorningof16.12.2011inRoomNo.208ofthe
saidhotel. PW1testifiedthattheaccusedtookhertothesaidhotelfrom

Hazarat Nizammuddin Railway Station in a TSR and upon inquiry he

informedherthatheistakinghertheretomeethisfamilymembers.
41.

Itwould bepertinent to notethat itisnot in disputethatthe

Accused isa residentof Moradabad, UP. In her crossexamination dated

25.09.2014Prosecutrix/PW1alsodeposedthatshehadvisitedMuradabadin
themonthofMay,2012tomeettheaccused.Thus,admittedly,theaccused
wasnotresidinginDelhialongwithhisfamily.Prosecutrix'PD',whowasin
touchwiththeaccusedsinceabout1yearpriorto14.12.2011,wouldalso,
inallprobability,bewellawarethattheAccusedandhisfamilymembers
werenotresidinginDelhi.Ithasalsoemergedfromhercrossexamination
thatshedidnotinformherfamilymembersthatshewasgoingtoDelhito
meettheAccused when sheleft from Raipur on 13.12.2011. In fact,the
Prosecutrixdeposedthatsheliedtoherfamilymembersthatshehastoattend
someofficialworkinDelhianddidnotrevealthatshewasgoingtoDelhito
meettheAccused andhisfamily members. Itisalso borneoutfrom her
crossexaminationthatinfact,allherfamilymembershadreservedtheirtrain
ticketsforgoingtoMathurafor16.12.2011andProsecutrixhadcancelledher

reservationfor16.12.2011andpreponedherprogrammeforreachingDelhi
twodayspriortheretoi.e.on14.12.2011. Thus,sheapparentlyalteredher
travel plans without informing her family members and reached Delhi on
14.12.2011,knowingfullywellthattheAccusedandhisfamilymembersdid
notresideinDelhi.ItisnotherclaimthatthefamilymembersofAccused
were also coming to Delhi from Moradabad, UP to meet her. It is also
apparent on going through the testimony of Prosecutrix that the Accused
checkedintothehotelOrchidGarden,DBGRoad,Delhion14.12.2011inher
presenceandintroducedherashisfianceetothehotelstaff.Evenatthattime
theProsecutrixdidnotobjecttothesame.
42.

Itisalsonoteworthythatinthecourseofhercrossexamination

recordedon25.09.2014,Prosecutrix'P.D.'alsostatedthatshehadinformed
her parents that she is going to Delhi on an official tour and the
accommodationwillbearrangedbyheroffice.Ithasalsocomeonrecordthat
shehadplanstoreachVrindavan,Mathuraon16.12.2011,forwhichdateher
parents had also reserved her train tickets. It is thus obvious that the
Prosecutrix reached Delhi on 14.12.2011 and intended to stay there till

16.12.2011.Itisnotherclaimthatshehadmadeanyreservationsforherstay
duringtheperiodfrom14.12.2011to16.12.2011.Thusapparently,whenthe
ProsecutrixreachedDelhion14.12.2011,shehadalreadyplannedtostaytill
16.12.2011. ShewasintroducedbytheAccusedashisfianceewhenthey
reachedhotelOrchidGarden,DBGRoad,Delhi. Sheadmittedlyraisedno
alarmornoisewhentheaccusedallegedlyrapedherinthesaidhotel. Her
claimthattheAccusedforciblycommittedrapeuponherandalsogaveher
assuranceofmarriageisindeedselfcontradictory.
43.

It is also pertinent to note that as per the testimony of

Prosecutrix,theAccusedestablishedphysicalrelationswithherseveraltimes
duringtheaforesaidperioddespitewhichshedidnotmakeanyefforttoleave
the hotel and she only checked out with the Accused in the morning of
16.12.2011,andnotpriorthereto.Inhercrossexamination'P.D.'alsostated
thatshewenttoMathuratomeetherGurjiaftercheckingoutfromthehotel
on16.12.2011anddidnotrevealabouttheincidenttoanyone.
44.

The above conduct of the Prosecutrix thus indicates that the

physical relations between her and Accused, were established with her

consent.TheclaimoftheProsecutrixthattheAccusedhadassuredherthat
hewillmarryherandthusobtainedherconsentunderthesaidmisconception
offact,tomymind,isnotsufficienttocoverthecasewithinthedefinitionof
rapeunderSection375IPC.
45.

Itiswellsettledlawthatapromisetomarrywithoutanythingmore

willnotgiverisetomisconceptionoffactwithinthemeaningofSection90
IPC. Inthecaseof N.JaladuILR(1913)36Mad453 relieduponbythe
Hon'bleApexCourtinDeelipSingh@DilipKumarvs.StaeofBihar,2005
SCC(Crl.)253,ithasbeenheldthatarepresentationdeliberatelymadebythe
Accused with aview to elicittheassent of thevictimwithout having the
intentionorinclinationtomarryher,willvitiatetheconsent.Ifonthefactsit
isestablishedthatattheveryinceptionofthemakingofpromisetheaccused
didnotreallyentertaintheintentionofmarryingherandthepromisetomarry
heldoutbyhimwasamerehoax,theconsentostensiblygivenbythevictim
willbeofnoavailtotheaccusedtoexculpatehimfromtheambitofSection
375clausesecondlyIPC.
46.

Itisequallywellsettledthattheonustoprovetheabsenceof

suchconsentliessolelyupon theProsecution. In thepresent casehaving

regardtotheevidenceledonrecord,IfindthattheProsecutionhasfailedto
discharge this onus. There is not even an iota of evidence on record to
establish that the accused did not entertain the intention of marrying the
Prosecutrix sincethevery inception or that theconsent of theProsecutrix
obtained by him ostensibly on the promise of marriage gave rise to any
misconceptionoffactwithinthemeaningofSection90IPC.
47.

In fact the testimony of the Prosecutrix itself reveals that the

Accusedhadbeentellingherthathehasnotbeenabletoremainintouchwith
heronaccountofillnessandhospitalizationofhismother.Similarly,inthe
transcriptEx.PW1/PF,Accused ispleading with theProsecutrix tolethis
motherrecoverfirst.
48.

ThoughtheProsecutrixhasalsoclaimedthatshecontactedone

AdvocatenamelySh.YuvrajSingh,who calledtheaccusedon28.02.2012,
butAccusedflatlytoldhimthathedoesnotknowher,yetMr.YuvrajSingh,
AdvocatehasneitherbeencitednorexaminedbytheProsecutionasawitness
tosubstantiatethisallegationoftheProsecutrix.Thereisnothingonrecordto

establishthattheAccusedfromtheverybeginningdidnotintendtomarry
Prosecutrixorthatthepromisetomarriageheldoutbyhimwasfalsefromits
veryinception.
49.

A perusal of thecomplaint made by theProsecutrix at Mahila

ThanaatRaipur(MarkPW1/PX1)alsorevealsthattheProsecutrixmadethe
saidcomplaintontheadviseofherknownpersons,whotoldherthatitappears
thataccusedhasditchedherandsheshouldreportthemattertothepolice.In
thesaidcomplaint,theProsecutrixhasherselfmentionedthatbeforemaking
anyreport,shewantstosettlethematterwiththeAccusedandthatheshould
becalledtotheMediationCentre. Moreover,theProsecutrixalsoadmitted
havingsentthetextmessagesEx.PW1/DAtotheAccusedafterthedateofthe
allegedincident. ThetranscriptEx.PW1/PEalsorevealsthattheProesutrix
andAccusedweresaying'ILoveyou'toeachotherinthesaidconversation.
50.

Consideringtheaboveevidenceinitstotalityandkeepingin

viewthefactsofthecase,itisapparentthattheProsecutrixandthe
Accused had entered into consensual physical relationship. The
Prosecution,asaforesaid,hasnotledanyevidencetoestablishthatwhenthe

Accused extended assurance of marriage to the Prosecutrix, it was a false

promise or that he did not entertain any intention of marrying the
Prosecutrixfromtheveryinception.Inabsenceofanycogentevidenceto
thiseffect,itcannotbeheldthattheProsecutrixgaveherconsentforphysical
relationship with the Accused under any misconception of fact as per the
mandateofSection90IPCorthatherconsentwasvitiatedonaccountofany
suchmisconceptiongiventoherbytheAccusedatanypointoftime.
51.

Accordingly, in the light of the above discussion, I am of the

consideredopinionthattheProsecutionhasfailedtobringhomechargeforthe
offencepunishableunderSection376IPCagainsttheAccusedHarishSharma.
Accused HarishSharmaS/oSh.YadramSharma isherebyacquittedofthe
offencepunishableunderSection376IPC. Hisbailbondstandscancelled.
SuretyDischarged.FilebeconsignedtoRecordRoom.
AnnouncedintheopenCourt
on31stdayofOctober,2015.
(KaveriBaweja)
AdditionalSessionsJudgeSpecialFTC2(Central)
TisHazariCourts:Delhi.