×

Delhi High Court sets free two men accused of gangraping colleague

The court gave verdict on an appeal filed by the duo who had challenged their conviction and 10 year jail term awarded by the trial court in July 2014.

Releasing the two men accused of gangrape of their colleague, High Court of Delhi said there was “inconsistency” in the woman’s version about the incident and that the two convicts “deserve the benefit of doubt.”

According to a report in DNA, Justice S P Garg directed their release from jail immediately, as he said, “…Nothing has come on record to show if during her employment in the factory for about a month, the appellants had an evil eye on her or had attempted any time to outrage her modesty. No complaint whatsoever was filed by the victim against any of the appellants any time.”

The convicts had been in custody since June 2009, and the court said, “Considering the inconsistent and conflicting versions narrated by the prosecutrix (woman) at different stages of investigation, conviction and sentence of the appellants cannot be sustained in the absence of independent corroboration. The appellants deserve benefit of doubt.”

The court gave verdict on an appeal filed by the duo who had challenged their conviction and 10 year jail term awarded by the trial court in July 2014. Besides the sentence, the two were also fined Rs 10,000 each.

 

Keeping aside the trial court’s order, High Court said that “on perusal of statements of the prosecution witnesses and various exhibits on record, they revealed infirmities or inconsistencies which have emerged on record making it unsafe to base conviction on the solitary testimony of the prosecutrix without independent corroboration.”

According to the police, the woman was gangraped by the two when she went to the factory premises of one of the accused on June 14, 2009. On the day of the alleged incident, she had gone there to collect her wages, police had said.

However, one of the accused during the trial had claimed innocence and told the court that the physical relations with the woman were with her consent.

 

Top