New Delhi: A 'tantrik' has been sentenced to 10 years in jail by a Delhi court for repeatedly raping his 14-year-old daughter, relying solely on her testimony.
Additional Sessions Judge TR Naval awarded the jail term to the Ashok Nagar resident for raping his minor daughter, observing that the strained relations between the parents may be a reason for sexual assault on the girl by her father.
"It is held that the prosecution has proved its case against the accused beyond any reasonable suspicion or shadow of doubt that he committed sexual intercourse with the victim, aged about 14-15 years forcibly against her will and without her consent. Therefore, accused is held guilty and convicted for the commission of offence of rape punishable under section 376 (rape) of the IPC," the court said and also imposed a fine of Rs 20,000 on the man.
The court rejected the man's plea that there was a delay in lodging the FIR by his daughter.
The court also rejected the man's plea that there was a delay in lodging the FIR by his daughter.
"It is an admitted fact that present case is a case by a daughter against a father where mother has strained relations with her father and due to that her mother was living most of the time separately from the girl and the accused.
"The girl was not having protection of any other person. In such circumstances, it is not expected from a daughter aged about 14-15 years to revolt against her father and immediately rush to police to lodge the report against her father," the judge said.
According to the prosecution, the girl had approached the police for lodging a complaint against her father who had raped her on the night of May 11, 2011 and several times before that also. She said her parents were having strained relations and due to this, most of the time her mother used to live separately and in her absence, he used to rape her.
The girl had said her father had slapped and threatened to kill her if she tried to raise an alarm. She said her father was a 'tantrik' and he used his power to have control over her.
The girl said she had told her mother about it and after consulting some relatives, they lodged a complaint against the man on June 8, 2011. The man, however, said he was falsely implicated in the case by his wife as she wanted to grab his property. He also said that his wife and daughter indulged in immoral activities and when he stopped them, they lodged a false case against him.
The court, however, rejected his contentions saying it was not convincing that the girl levelled false allegations against her father when he stopped her from indulging in
alleged immoral activities.
"The evidence on record has established that relationship between the father and mother of the girl were strained, there had been dispute between them over the house property and that accused had made various complaints against them. The complaints placed and proved on record could only establish the dispute over the house property only between the parents of the prosecutrix.
"However, it could not be established that either the girl or her mother had been indulging in immoral activities," the judge said, adding, "I find testimony of the girl wholly reliable, consistent and trustworthy."