New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Wednesday upheld a lower court verdict awarding seven years jail term to a man for raping a minor girl several times in confinement for a week after procuring her from a couple on paying Rs 5,000.
"The appeal (of convict Rajesh Kumar Tyagi) is devoid of any merit and the same is accordingly dismissed," Justice G P Mittal said, adding the testimony of the minor victim had established the guilt of the convict beyond reasonable doubt.
Besides the fine, Tyagi was awarded two years and seven years of jail term by the lower court in 2009 for the offences of purchasing a girl and rape respectively.
Upholding the lower court verdict, Justice Mittal rejected the plea of Tyagi that he cannot be convicted as he married the victim.
Referring to the victim`s testimony, the court said "she was quite categorical that she was not lawfully married and the alleged marriage was not with her consent.
"Thus, taking away of the girl `H` from Delhi by co-accused Nazma and others was established. The girl was recovered from the house of the appellant (Tyagi). The appellant was arrested from his house. Thus, the finding reached by the Additional Sessions Judge that the prosecutrix was sold to the appellant and that the appellant committed had sexual intercourse with her without her consent cannot be faulted."
An FIR was lodged at a police station here on July 24, 2003 that two minor girls, including the victim in the case, have been kidnapped.
Later, one of the girls, the victim in the case, was recovered from Basia village in Moradabad district of Uttar Pradesh with the help of an NGO.
She had told the lower court that her neighbour and co-accused Nazma and her husband Mohd Azad took her to away and sold to Tyagi.
The victim had also said the accused raped her "two-three
times a day for six-seven days" after procuring her from the accused couple after paying Rs 5,000.
The High Court rejected the plea of the convict that the victim herself had said that she was married to him.
"This part of PW-7`s (victim) testimony in cross examination cannot be read in isolation and has to be read along with examination-in-chief and the cross examination conducted on behalf of the appellant.
"The prosecutrix, in her cross examination, clearly stated that the appellant used to commit rape on her 2-3 times daily for 6-7 days ...," the court said.