A sessions court here has discharged a man in a rape case registered against him in 2020, citing “countless inconsistencies” in the complaint of the alleged victim and saying mere general allegations are not sufficient to raise grave suspicion against the accused.
The court, however, ordered framing of charges against another accused for the alleged offences pertaining to Indian Penal Code Section 509 (word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman) and Section 323 (voluntarily causing hurt).
Additional Sessions Judge Navjeet Budhiraja was hearing a case against Mohit, who was accused of raping and having unnatural sex with the complainant, while Damodar was alleged to have hit the woman’s husband and insulted her modesty.
The judge noted the alleged victim’s complaint and statement, except for one occasion, did not mention the exact date and time when rape was allegedly committed, in spite of her claim that the torture continued for two years.
“The offence of rape and carnal intercourse is of serious nature and mere general allegations are not sufficient to raise grave suspicion against the accused which would warrant the framing of charges against him,” the judge said.
The court said according to the complaint, the alleged incidents of sexual assault had been continuing for two years before the filing of the complaint but “no plausible and tenable explanation” was provided for the delay in lodging the complaint.
“The complainant alleged that Mohit had offered her a cold drink and after consuming the same, she became intoxicated, and he then committed rape upon her and also made a video of the incident and on that pretext, he kept on continuously raping her,” the court said in an order dated December 15.
“However, in the mobile phone seized at the instance of the accused, no such video was found or discovered as per the report of forensic science laboratory (FSL),” it added.
Also Read
The court said according to the final report submitted by the Delhi Police, there were “countless inconsistencies” in the woman’s complaint. It said there was a history of minor quarrels between the accused and the alleged victim’s family.
“I do not find the allegation of rape and carnal intercourse against the accused Mohit to be substantiated for framing of charge against him,” it said.
Regarding the role of Damodar, the court noted the specific allegation that he had hit the complainant’s husband, besides insulting the woman’s modesty during an altercation on May 31, 2020.
Noting the evidence before it, the court said Damodar had to be tried for the offences under IPC sections 323 and 509.
