Court puts DJB ex-engineer on trial in 2006 rape case
A Delhi court has decided to put on trial a former engineer of Delhi Jal Board (DJB) accused of raping a senior executive of a private firm in 2006, saying a prima facie case is made out against him.
New Delhi: A Delhi court has decided to put on trial a former engineer of Delhi Jal Board (DJB) accused of raping a senior executive of a private firm in 2006, saying a prima facie case is made out against him.
While putting on trial Sarat Chandra, the court discharged two other DJB engineers -- Praveen Bhargava and Ramesh Thakur, who were also accused of raping the executive.
"...Prima facie case under section 328 (administering stupefying drug with intent to cause hurt) read with section 376 (rape) of IPC is made out against accused Sarat Chander.
"No case is made out against the accused persons namely Praveen Bhargava and Ramesh Thakur. They are discharged of the offence punishable under section 376 (2)(g) (gang rape) of IPC, under which they have been summoned," Additional Sessions Judge Sanjiv Jain said.
The court directed the accused Sarat Chander to appear before District and Sessions Judge on October 8.
Additional Public Prosecutor A T Ansari said after Delhi High Court quashed an FIR and subsequent criminal proceedings against the three officials, the state had moved the Supreme Court which had returned the matter to the trial court with a direction to proceed afresh on the point of charge.
The High Court had on May 24 allowed the plea of the DJB engineers and quashed the trial court order summoning the officials to stand trial in the case despite a closure report filed by police stating that they were falsely implicated.
In its final report, filed on June 2, 2010, Delhi Police had said there was "no sufficient evidence" against the accused and argued that the case be closed.
After going through the final report, the trial court had refused to accept the police version.
The trial judge had also trashed the allegations of the police that the victim was acting at the behest of her employer to malign the officials saying there were two witnesses who corroborated the allegations of the victim.
The victim was a senior executive with a private firm engaged in contract work for DJB. In her complaint, she had alleged that she was raped by the accused at her rented house on October 8, 2006, after being offered a pastry laced with sedatives.
She had alleged that the trio had also videotaped her being gangraped and used the footage to blackmail her. She had said that she used to meet them in connection with contracts awarded to the firm.