Decided on January 08,2016

Naginadevi Jamunaprasad Yadav Appellant
Manojkumar Baburam Yadav Respondents


Abhay M. Thipsay, J. - (1.) On The Basis Of The First Information Report Lodged By the present appellant, the respondent No.1 herein was prosecuted on the allegation of having committed offences punishable under Sections 354A, 354B, 354C, 354D of the Indian Penal Code (For Short, 'the IPC'), 366 of the IPC, 380 of the IPC and 506 of the IPC. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Thane, after holding a trial, found the respondent No.1 not guilty and acquitted him. The appellant is aggrieved by the said order of acquittal. Claiming to be a victim of the alleged offence, she has filed the present appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(2.) I have heard Mr.Tarun Kumar Sinha, the learned counsel for the appellant. I have carefully gone through the Judgment and Order. I have glanced through the copies of the notes of evidence, that are annexed to the Appeal Memo.
(3.) The Prosecution Case, As Was Made Out Against The Respondent No.1 (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused' for the sake of convenience and clarity), may, in brief, be stated thus : The appellant (hereinafter referred to as 'the prosecutrix' for the sake of convenience and clarity) was studying in a Highschool at Thane. The accused, who was residing in the same locality where she resided, proposed her. The prosecutrix refused, but the accused persisted and threatened to kill her parents and brother, to throw acid on her, etc.; and, therefore, the prosecutrix was constrained to speak to him. In the year 2010, once while the prosecutrix was returning home from her college along with her friend, the appellant came in a rickshaw and asked her to sit in the rickshaw. She sat. She asked the accused as to where he was taking her, and also said that she should be allowed to get down, and also threatened that should she not be allowed to get down, she would scream loudly. The accused then threatened to kill her. The prosecutrix then requested the autorickshaw driver to stop the rickshaw, but he did not listen to her and continued to drive. The prosecutrix was taken to a lodge, where the accused committed rape on her. The accused and prosecutrix then left the lodge room, sat in a rickshaw and the accused dropped the prosecutrix at some place. That, in the year 2011 also, while the prosecutrix was studying in college, on one occasion, the accused came there, made her sit in rickshaw, took her to the same lodge and attempted to commit rape on her. On the same night, the prosecutrix learnt from other that the accused had consumed poison and was vomitting. The prosecutrix was scared. In the year 2012, the prosecutrix realized that her 10th Std. and 12th Std. Marksheets and certificates as well as medical papers were missing from home.That, on 09/03/2012, the accused came to the college of the prosecutrix, made her sit in rickshaw and threatened her that her previous video was with him, and if she would try to act oversmart, he would show it to everybody. She got scared and, therefore, sat in the rickshaw. The accused took her to Ashtavinayak Vivah Karyalaya, where he made his signature on a form. The prosecutrix saw that the accused was having her 10th Std. and 12th Std. marksheets which were stolen from her house. The accused prepared false marriage certificate and had been threatening her since then. The accused filed a false case in a Court in Uttar Pradesh, which was dismissed.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.