New Delhi [India], September 23 (ANI): A Delhi court has acquitted a man of charges including rape, administering an intoxicating substance, extortion, criminal intimidation and destruction of evidence, observing that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.
Additional Sessions Judge Sushil Anuj Tyagi of the South-West District, Dwarka Courts, passed the judgment after examining the testimony of the complainant, hotel records, bank transactions, call-detail records, electronic evidence and other material collected during the investigation.
According to the prosecution case, the complainant received a call from an unknown number in October 2020. The caller addressed her by her nickname and introduced himself to her. The two subsequently remained in contact over the phone.
The complainant later met the accused in Bengaluru and continued communicating with him after returning to Delhi.
She alleged that on December 24, 2020, the accused called her to a hotel in Dwarka, where he allegedly gave her a cold drink after which she lost consciousness. She claimed that after regaining consciousness, she found herself without clothes.
She further alleged that the accused showed her a video of them and threatened to make it public. According to her complaint, he thereafter allegedly forced her into physical relations and threatened her with the alleged video. She also alleged that money was demanded from her and that she transferred around Rs 1.5 lakh through GPay.
The FIR was registered at Dwarka South Police Station on May 8, 2021, more than four months after the alleged incident.
Appearing for the accused, advocate Ravi Drall argued that there was a substantial delay in registration of the FIR and that the prosecution had failed to provide a satisfactory explanation.
The defence also relied upon hotel records showing that the complainant and accused stayed together at Jannat Residency Hotel from December 24 to 26, 2020, and subsequently at Imperial Hotel from December 26 to 27, 2020.
The judgment records that the complainant provided identification documents at the hotel and did not make any complaint to the hotel staff or police during her stay. The court also noted that she continued to meet and communicate with the accused after the alleged incident.
The defence further relied upon the complainant’s communications with the accused through WhatsApp, Instagram and phone calls.
The court also examined the allegation that the accused had recorded an objectionable video and used it to blackmail the complainant.
It noted that no such video was recovered from the accused’s mobile phone during the investigation. The court also noted that the complainant had not handed over her own mobile phone to the investigating officer, stating that it had been broken.
The defence relied on electronic conversations produced during the trial. However, the court observed that only two conversations and their transcripts had been placed on record and that they were insufficient to form an opinion regarding the alleged incident or blackmail.
The court examined the legal principles governing conviction based on the testimony of a prosecutrix and referred to several Supreme Court judgments.
It observed that while conviction can be based on the sole testimony of a prosecutrix when it inspires confidence, the evidence in the present case required scrutiny in light of the surrounding circumstances and other material on record.
The court particularly considered the delay in lodging the FIR, the complainant’s subsequent conduct, hotel records, absence of recovery of the alleged video and limitations in the electronic evidence. (ANI)
Related reading
