No gang-rape in Maulana Azad medical college case: HC

February 08, 2010 07:49 pm | Updated 07:49 pm IST - NEW DELHI:

Dismissing the charge of gang-rape in the Maulana Azad Medical College rape case, in which a student of the college was sexually assaulted in broad daylight on the terrace of a Mughal monument in Central Delhi in 2002, the Delhi High Court on Monday upheld the rape charge against one of the convicts and set free the other with awarding sentence already undergone.

The trial court had in 2005 sentenced the convicts, Rahul and Amit, to life imprisonment holding them guilty under Sections 376 (2) (g) (gang-rape), 392 (robbing the mobile phone of the victim) and 397 (robbery with attempt to cause grievous hurt) of the Indian Penal Code.

However, it had acquitted the two other accused, Ashok, of the charge of harbouring the accused, and Mohan Lal of the charge dishonestly receiving stolen property from the accused, saying that the prosecution had not been able to prove the charges against them.

A Division Bench of the Court comprising Justice Pradeep Nandrajog and Justice Suresh Kait dismissed the gang-rape charge against the two convicts.

However, the Bench upheld the charge of rape against Rahul and dismissed his appeal challenging his conviction by the trial court.

As for Amit, it held him guilty of robbery and criminal intimidation. However, it ordered his release from jail saying that his maximum sentence would be only the period of imprisonment he had already undergone.

“It cannot be said with certainty that Amit shared any common intention with Rahul and in furtherance thereof facilitated the prosecutrix being raped by Rahul. The submission of learned counsel for the State that in all probability Amit stood guard at the ground floor level to facilitate Rahul to satisfy his lust has to be rejected for the reason there is no evidence that Amit stood guard when the prosecutrix was forcibly taken upstairs,’’ the Bench said.

There were a total of six accused in the case two of whom were juvenile. The juvenile accused had pleaded guilty before a juvenile justice court in 2003.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.