5 acquitted in trespassing, assault case
A Delhi court has acquitted five people accused of trespassing into a neighbour’s house and assaulting three members of a family, saying the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt and its case was riddled with material contradictions.
Additional Sessions Judge Yadvender Singh acquitted Hari Ram, Promila, Sunita, Hari Kishan and Sunil Lakra of charges under Indian Penal Code (IPC) Sections 452 (house trespass after preparation for hurt), 308 (attempt to commit culpable homicide) and 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), all read with section 34 (common intention).
The three accused were also acquitted of offences under IPC sections 354 (assault on a woman with intent to outrage her modesty) and 354B (assault or criminal force with intent to disrobe a woman).
In an order dated June 9, the court said, “The prosecution has miserably failed to prove the complicity of the accused persons for the commission of the crime beyond the shadow of all reasonable doubts and has not been able to prove all the ingredients of the offences for which the accused persons have been charged and facing trial.”
The case arose from an incident on March 26, 2014, in West Delhi’s Ranhola area. The complainant had alleged that the accused had entered her house, assaulted her and her two sons with iron rods and sticks, tore her clothes and outraged her modesty.
The court said the testimonies of the complainant and her two injured sons could not be relied upon because they gave conflicting accounts about the weapons allegedly used, the role played by each accused and the manner in which the injuries were caused.
The judge noted that the prosecution had failed to recover the alleged weapons of offence and that the weapons were not even mentioned in the initial complaint. The court also found serious discrepancies regarding the seizure of blood-stained clothes allegedly worn by the injured persons at the time of the incident. “Merely bald allegations against the accused persons cannot be a substitute of proof against them. Merely the bald allegations also cannot remove the burden of proof from the prosecution to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt,” the court said.
The medical evidence also failed to support the prosecution’s case, it pointed out, noting that all injuries were opined to be simple and a doctor had conceded that some of the injuries could have been caused by a fall on a hard surface.
The court further said allegations of outraging the complainant’s modesty and tearing her clothes were not corroborated by other eyewitnesses and remained doubtful. Holding that the prosecution had “miserably failed” to establish the charges and that its case did not inspire confidence, the court acquitted all five accused.
