Delhi High Court: Vibhu Bakhru, J., upheld the decision of trial court for offence of rape and videographing the same while clicking nude photographs of the victim.
Appellant filed an appeal against the judgment convicting him for offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n)/ 354C/ 506 of Penal Code, 1860.
Background of Case
Appellant had raped a 20 year old girl and videographed the act along with clicking nude photographs of her. Further he blackmailed her while demanding 5 lakh rupees.
Prosecutrix’s stance
The accused kept pursuing the prosecutrix to meet through various messages and calls from unknown numbers and while the prosecutrix kept ignoring the same and warned him that she will complaint to the police and in response accused said that he would commit suicide and she would be responsible for the same.
Next day, again the accused gave a call to the prosecutrix asking her to come to Nirman Vihar Station otherwise he would commit suicide and bring disrepute to her. Fearing the same, she wen to meet him after which the accused took her to a guest house and forcibly established physical relationship, taking nudes photographs her and recording the same.
Further he threatened her that in case she doesn’t attends his calls and comes to the places where he calls her, she would have to suffer ignominy. Next day, she informed her family members and a complaint was lodged.
In another statement under Section 164 CrPC to police, the difference noted was the following:
“…he had pulled her hair and slapped her and further told her that if she screamed, no one would listen to her. He ordered her to remove her clothes. He also rung up someone (purportedly, to his uncle) and stated that “chacha ye ladki maan nahi rahi hai, aap aa jaao”.
Bench Observed that,
There is no inconsistency in her statement that the appellant had forcibly established physical relationship with her.
Any doubt that could have been entertained regarding whether the prosecutrix and the appellant had any consensual sex is removed by the fact that the appellant had prepared a video clip of him establishing physical relationship with the prosecutrix.
Therefore, the testimony of the prosecutrix that the appellant had threatened her that he would upload her video and photographs on the net, cannot be disbelieved.
Court found no infirmity with the decision of the Trial Court in convicting the appellant for committing offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 506 (Part I) and 354 C of the Penal Code, 1860.
Thus, in view of the above, appeal stands dismissed. [Rahul v. State, 2020 SCC OnLine Del 596 , decided on 18-05-2020]
The girl herself is going with him, she did not call the police when he called him and having enough time before reaching the meeting point. For what she was waiting ? And after that all that. And when it has been mentioned that he told her that he will die. It means lots of things were there in the past between them. Secondly if he was doing this she must have recorded something.. I don’t don’t think she’s telling a truth.