Husband’s impotent. Bro in law And FIL tried 2 rape me. I’ve taken 7.8 lakhs so all ok!

Note: This post has been referred from Mr. Subu Subramaniam’s post from his blog. We appreciaate his efforts towards Men’s Rights Activism for the same.

2 brother in laws did unnatural sex on me. They put a pistol on my head and ….. my father in law entered my room and sexually assaulted me . He attempted to rape me. My Husband is impotent and sleeps in his mother’s room !!…so I filed police complaint and my father in law was arrested  …. But I’ve taken 8 lakhs so NO ONE RAPED ME !! Gem of a case from Delhi District courts.

7

Excerpts

* Her marriage could not be consummated as her husband is impotent … he used to sleep in his mother’s room !.
* One day her brother-in-law Avnish Kumar came into her room during night, bolted the door from inside & forcibly committed un-natural sex with her. He also put one pistol on her …..!
* After some days … her brother-in- law (jeth) Pushpender Kumar entered her room, bolted door from inside and forcibly committed un-natural sex after putting a pistol on her … !
* After about ten days of the incident, her father-in-law Hoshiar Singh also entered her room and bolted the door of the room from inside and ..tried to commit rape upon her….!
* Her husband put a pistol on her neck and got her signatures on two affidavits and one blank paper.

Because of her complaints

* Accused Hoshiar Singh (father in law) was arrested and his disclosure statement was recorded. All the other accused were granted anticipatory bail.

but ..but …
* …she has received a sum of Rs.7,90,000/- from accused ….and all their disputes stand settled by way of the aforesaid settlement….

  • so ..now the poor woman says “….All the accused are innocent. They have not subjected me to any kind of illegal or wrong act….”

Delhi District Court

State vs . 1. Hoshiar Singh S/O Lala Ram on 22 April, 2015

Author: Sh. Virender Bhatt

IN THE COURT OF SH. VIRENDER BHAT, A.S.J. (SPECIAL
FAST TRACK COURT), DWARKA COURTS, NEW DELHI.
SC No.20/15
Unique Case ID No.02405R0020872015.

State

Vs.

  1. Hoshiar Singh s/o Lala Ram
  2. Sunil Kumar s/o Hoshiar Singh
  3. Pushpender Kumar s/o Hoshiar Singh
  4. Avnish Kumar s/o Hoshiar Singh
  5. Vaijanti Devi w/o Hoshiar Singh
  6. Sushma Devi w/o Pushpender Kumar
  7. Harinder Kumar s/o Hoshiar Singh
  8. Niresh @ Nitu d/o Hoshiar Singh

All R/o House No.333, VPO Mirhachi, Distt. Etah (U.P.).

Date of Institution :24.02.2015.

FIR No.699/14 dated 08.08.2014.
U/s. 498A/406/376/506/354/34 IPC.
P.S. Najafgarh.

Date of reserving judgment/Order :22.04.2015.
Date of pronouncement : 22.04.2015.

JUDGMENT

  1. The above named accused have been facing trial for having committed the offences u/s 498A/406/376/506/354/34 IPC.
  2. As per the case of the prosecution, Complainant ‘A’ (real name has been withheld in order to conceal her identity) filed a complaint before ACP/CAW Cell. Sec.9, Dwarka. As per the complaint of prosecutrix/complainant ‘A’, she got married to accused Sunil Kumar s/o accused Hoshiar Singh on 08.02.2013 as per Hindu Rites and Ceremonies and her parents had spent more than Rs. 15 lacs in her marriage and they had given gold jewellery, clothes and cash amount in the marriage to accused persons. After her marriage, when she reached her matrimonial house i.e. Village Mirhachi, Mohalla Bhimnagar, PS Mirhachi, Eta, U.P., her in-laws did not welcome her properly. On 9.2.2013, all her jewellery was taken by her husband accused Sunil, her father-in-law Hoshiar Singh and her mother-in-law accused Vaijanti Devi and told her that it would be kept at a safe place. On 10.2.2013 when prosecutrix demanded back her jewellery to wear, they refused. At the time of pug-phera, she alongwith her husband Sunil, her in- laws and eighteen more persons visited her parental house and her parents had spent about a sum of Rs. 45,000/-. Her in-laws had also demanded a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- in cash, a Wagon-R Car, gold earrings for ladies and gold rings for gents from her parents. They also told her parents that if they did not fulfil their demands, they would not take prosecutrix alongwith them. However, when prosecutrix’s parents prevailed upon them, they took prosecutrix alongwith them. Her marriage also could not be consummated as her husband is impotent and when she intimated this fact to her mother-in-law, she did not give any satisfactory reply as her in- laws were already aware about the said fact. Her husband, accused Sunil works in Tata Motor Company in District Panth Nagar, Utrakhand and when he used to come home once in two/three months, he used to sleep in the room of his mother. One day her brother-in-law accused Avnish Kumar came into her room during night time and bolted the door from inside and forcibly committed un-natural sex with her. He also put one pistol on her temple saying that if she disclosed the incident to anybody, he would kill her and due to fear, she did not tell anybody about the incident. After some days of the aforesaid incident, her brother-in- law (jeth) Pushpender Kumar entered her room and bolted the door of the room from inside and forcibly committed un-natural sex with her after putting a pistol on her temple. He also threatened her that in case she disclosed the incident to anybody, she would be killed by the same pistol. She could not tell anybody about this incident also due to fear of accused. Her in-laws also did not permit her to talk to her parents. After about ten days of the incident, her father-in-law Hoshiar Singh also entered her room and bolted the door of the room from inside and sexually assaulted her. He tried to commit rape upon her. He also threatened her that in case she disclosed the incident to anybody, he would kill her or throw her in Hazara Lake after making her unconscious. One day prosecutrix apprised her mother-in-law Vaijanti Devi, sisters-in-law Sushma Devi (jethani) and Niresh @ Nitu (nanad) about her sufferings, but they also hurled abuses at her and gave beatings to her. Her father-in-law Hoshiar Singh, brothers-in-law Pushpender and Avnish Kumar threatened her that in case she disclosed the incident to anybody at Delhi, they would kill her. She narrated the incidents to her husband accused Sunil Kumar after about one month when he came back from Utrakhand but he also told her not to disclose the incidents to anybody and that he would prevail upon all the accused. Next morning her husband alongwith other accused hurled abuses at her and gave beatings to her with kicks, fists and rod. Her husband put a pistol on her neck and got her signatures on two affidavits and one blank paper. On the festival of Holi, her father and her brother came to her matrimonial house alongwith gifts on 15.3.2014 but they were not attended properly by her in-laws and she returned to her parental house alongwith them. Neither her husband nor her in- laws made any phone call to her nor came to take her back. On the asking of her mother, she disclosed the fact of impotency of her husband accused Sunil, commission of un-natural sex with her by her brothers-in-law and sexual assault and attempt to commit rape upon her by her father-in-law and all the cruelties inflicted upon her by her in-laws, to her mother. http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ ; http://fromvinayak.blogspot.com
  3. On the basis of aforesaid complaint of the prosecutrix, FIR u/s 498A/406/376/506/354/34 IPC was registered and the investigation was handed over to W SI Anita. Prosecutrix’s statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C. was got recorded. Accused Hoshiar Singh was arrested and his disclosure statement was recorded. All the other accused were granted anticipatory bail.
  4. After the completion of the investigation, the charge sheet was laid before the concerned ld. Magistrate, who committed the case to the Court of Sessions as the offences were exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions.

5. The charge for having committed the offences punishable u/s 498A/34 IPC, 406/34 IPC and u/s 506/34 IPC were framed against all the accused on 01.04.2015. Further charge u/s 354 IPC, u/s 376 IPC r/w Sec. 511 IPC and u/s 506 IPC was framed against accused Hoshiar Singh. Further charge u/s 377 IPC and u/s 506 IPC was framed against accused Avnish Kumar and further charge u/s u/s 377 IPC and u/s 506 IPC was framed against accused Pushpender Kumar. Accused pleaded not guilty to the charges framed against them and therefore, trial was commenced.

  1. The prosecutrix was the star witness for the prosecution. She has been examined today as PW-1. The relevant portion of her deposition is reproduced herein below:-

I got married to accused Sunil Kumar on 08.2.2013. After the marriage, my husband used to stay at his place of employment in Uttrakhand. My relations with my in-laws were not cordial. Accordingly, I came to my parental home on 15.3.2014. I told my parents that since my husband lives at Uttrakhand and my relations with my in laws are not cordial, I cannot stay with them. My father took me to the police station where I narrated my plight to the police officials. The police officials took my signatures on certain blank papers. They also asked me to write something on a paper and asked me to sign the same. I do not recollect what I had written on that paper. The contents of my said statement Ex.PW1/A are totally false. I had made this statement on the pressure of the police officials. The allegations contained in the said statement against the accused are totally incorrect. No such incident of molestation, rape or attempt to rape or any other kind of sexual assault had taken place. My husband and my in laws never demanded any dowry from me. They had never assaulted me. They never issued any threat to me. They did not take any of my dowry/Istri Dhan articles. I had gone to the police station only with the complaint that my relations with my in laws are not cordial and they harass me on petty issues. I do not know how FIR was registered by the police officials and on what ground. All the accused are innocent. They have not subjected me to any kind of illegal or wrong act.”

  1. The prosecutrix was declared hostile by ld. APP and in the cross examination conducted by ld. APP, she denied all the suggestions put to her. She denied the suggestion that she did not sign on the blank papers in the police station and that her signatures were not taken by the police officials on some written papers, which she did not go through. She denied that she herself had submitted a typed complaint in the police station. She also denied the suggestion that immediately after the marriage i.e. 09.2.2013, her husband and in-laws had taken all her jewellery articles and then refused to return the same to her on 10.2.2013. She also denied the suggestion that her in-laws demanded a sum of Rs.10 Lacs, Wagon R car, earrings for ladies and golden rings for gents from her parents on 10.2.2013. She also denied that her brother-in-law Avnish Kumar committed rape or unnatural sex with her on 22.10.2013 on the point of revolver or that her another brother-in-law Pushpender Kumar also committed unnatural sex with her on 02.11.2013. She denied the suggestion that her father-in-law Hoshiyar Singh molested her during one night in her room and then threatened her that he would kill her and would throw her in the canal after making her unconscious, if she narrated these incidents to anybody. She also denied that she narrated these incidents to her mother-in-law, sisters-in-law (Jethani and Nanad) and they abused her and beat her by fists and kicks and threatened to kill her. She further denied the suggestion that she narrated the incidents to her husband also, who too asked her to keep quiet and threatened to kill her and took her signatures on two affidavits and attempted to kill her. She denied the suggestion that her father and brother had brought various goods to her matrimonial home on 15.3.2014 but they were humiliated by her in-laws and for that reason, she accompanied them to her parental house. She further denied that she had given true and correct statement to the Ld. M.M. and also to the police and that she deposed falsely today at the instance of the accused as she has been won over by them. She denied having made any statement u/s.161 Cr.PC and deposed that the same is totally fabricated and incorrect. She admitted during her cross examination conducted by ld. APP that her husband is impotent, due to which, their marriage could not be consummated and this was the reason that her relations with her husband and her in-laws were not cordial and that the accused persons have been falsely implicated in this case and all of them are innocent. http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ ; http://fromvinayak.blogspot.com

 

  • In the cross examination conducted on behalf of accused, she admitted that during the course of hearing of anticipatory bail application of the accused, the matter was referred to mediation, where a settlement was reached between her and the accused, which she proved as Ex. PW1/D1. She also admitted that pursuant to the aforesaid settlement, she and accused Sunil Kumar have filed a petition for divorce by mutual consent and first motion petition has been allowed by the Family Court, Dwarka. She also admitted that she has received a sum of Rs.7,90,000/- from the accused pursuant to the aforesaid settlement and all their disputes stand settled by way of the aforesaid settlement.
  • Hence it is seen that the prosecutrix has deposed totally contrary to the prosecution case. Noting inculpatory against accused has come in her testimony. The prosecutrix specifically deposed that her husband is impotent due to which their marriage could not be consummated and this was the reason that her relations were not cordial with her husband and her in-laws and that the accused persons have been falsely implicated in this case. She specifically deposed that all the accused are innocent and they have not subjected her to any kind of illegal or wrong act.
  • Since the prosecutrix has not supported the case of the prosecution and there being no other eye witness to the incident, It was found futile to carry on trial of the case any further. For the same reason, recording of statement of accused persons u/s 313 Cr.P.C. was also dispensed with. The Ld. APP also has fairly conceded that nothing inculpatory has come in evidence against any of the accused.
  • The testimony of the prosecutrix shows that her marriage was not consummated on account of impotency of her husband, which was the sole reason for her strained relations with her husband and in-laws. She had left her matrimonial house only for this reason and filed a false complaint alleging rape as well as unnatural sex by her brothers-in-law and molestation as well as attempt to rape by her father-in-law, only to put pressure upon her husband and in-laws to divorce her. She ultimately succeeded in getting divorce from her husband and also money towards her claims regarding maintenance, stridhan etc. The fact remains that she had implicated all the accused falsely in this case by levelling baseless allegations upon them to serve her own ends.
  • Resultantly, all the accused are liable to be acquitted and are hereby acquitted.

 

Announced in open (VIRENDER BHAT)
Court on 22.04.2015. Addl. Sessions Judge
(Special Fast Track Court)
Dwarka Courts, New Delhi.

 

Leave a Reply