IT engineer held guilty of rape; refused to marry SC girl
In her complaint, the victim said the accused, Sushant, would follow her on her way to college and that he had raped her twice in a hotel in the city.
An IT engineer who refused to marry a 22-year-old BA final year student because she belonged to the Scheduled Caste community has been held guilty of rape.
The quantum of punishment against Himachal Pradesh resident Sushant will be announced on Tuesday at the court of additional district and sessions judge Vijay Singh.
Continuing since 2016, the rape trial had taken a sudden twist after the National Commission for Scheduled Castes directed the UT police to add offences of the SC Act to the FIR in December 2017.
The daughter of a lab attendant in the city, the woman had filed a complaint with the Chandigarh police on September 1, 2016, alleging that Sushant, then 24 and living in her colony, would follow her on her way to college. On July 9 of the same year, he had taken her to a hotel in Sector 52 and raped her twice, using protection only once.
According to the FIR, she did not disclose the incident to her family out of fear as he had threatened to kill her if she did do. However, after he tried to get physical with her again she told her family members about it and a case was registered at the Sector 36 police station for rape.
The court of additional district and sessions judge Anshu Shukla had then heard the case (it was then the special court for crimes against women) but dismissed the survivor’s plea to cancel Sushant’s bail and add more offences in the chargesheet. Eventually, however, the SC Commission in New Delhi had to step in and direct the Chandigarh police to file a supplementary challan for offences under the SC and ST Act.
The case was transferred to the family court which also has jurisdiction for offences under the SC and ST Act in January 2018 and a fresh trial began under sections 376(2)(n) (rape), 506 (punishment for criminal intimidation), 419 (punishment for cheating by personation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sections 3(1)(W)(i) of the SC and ST Act.
Arguing for the defendant, counsel Rabindra Pandit argued that Sushant and the woman were acquainted and pointed out to her plea being dismissed by the court earlier.
Pandit had also argued that the accused had hired an autorickshaw and ensured the girl was dropped home safely after the act, which he said was consensual. She had also informed her family about the incident six months later, he added.
The court was also told that since the two had been intimate over a period of time, Sushant must have been aware of the fact that the woman belonged to the SC community.
Courtesy: The Hindustan Times