RAHUL TOMAR vs STATE

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on : 15.09.2025 Pronounced on : 06.10.2025 + CRL.A. 693/2016 RAHUL TOMAR .....Appellant Through: Ms. Rakhi Dubey, Advocate (DHCLSC) with Ms. Arpita Srivastava, Advocate with appellant in person versus STATE .....Respondent Through: Mr. Pradeep Gahalot, APP for State with SI Manisha. Ms. Gayatri Nandwani, Ms. Mudita Sharda and Mr. Adrian Abbi, Advocates for victim CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI JUDGMENT 1. The present appeal has been instituted under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. seeking setting aside of the impugned judgment dated 08.04.2016 and the order on sentence dated 19.04.2016 passed by the learned ASJ, Special Fast Track Court-01, West, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in SC No. 108/2013, arising out of FIR No. 58/2013 registered under Section 376 IPC at P.S. Nihal Vihar. 2. The FIR came to be recorded on the statement of the victim with the allegation that in the first week of November 2012, the accused had followed her when she was returning after filling water, entered her house, Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:NIJAMUDDEEN ANSARI CRL.A.693/2016 Page 1 of 8 Signing Date:07.10.2025 00:53:24 and thereafter committed rape upon her. On conclusion of investigation, the chargesheet was filed under Sections 376/506 IPC, and charges were framed on 04.05.2013 under the aforesaid sections. The order on charge was subsequently modified to reflect the correct address of the victim. The prosecution examined 11 witnesses in support of its case, the primary witness being the prosecutrix herself. The cousin of the prosecutrix was examined as PW-3, the doctor who had examined the prosecutrix was examined as PW-5, and the I.O. of the case, SI Koyal, was examined as PW- 11. The appellant also examined 3 witnesses in h