New Delhi, Feb 16 A Delhi court has acquitted two men accused of trafficking and wrongfully confining a woman in 2014, observing that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt after the complainant turned hostile during trial.
Additional Sessions Judge Anuj Agrawal acquitted Kurban Ali and Tejarth Mohammad of offences under Sections 370 (trafficking), 342 (wrongful confinement) and 34 (common intention) of the IPC.
"I have no hesitation in holding that prosecution has failed miserably to prove guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubts and they deserve to be acquitted for all the charges levelled against them," the court said in its February 11 judgment.
The case stemmed from an FIR registered at New Friends Colony Police Station on a complaint by the woman, who had alleged that she was brought to Delhi on the pretext of employment and was confined at a placement agency operating from Taimoor Nagar.
According to the prosecution, on December 24, 2014, the woman was allegedly handed over to the accused by a third person, Sapan Uraon, who was declared absconding during investigation. Police claimed that the accused demanded money from the victim's husband and refused to let her return home.
However, during trial, the complainant retracted her earlier allegations and denied that she had been trafficked, confined or forced to work.
"I have come from my native village with Sapan Urrao with my own volition to Delhi and started working. I was not enticed or trafficked in any manner. I do not know anything else," she told the court.
Despite being cross-examined by the prosecution after being declared hostile, she denied making the complaint and her statement before the judicial magistrate under Section 164 of the CrPC. During cross-examination by the defence, she admitted that the accused "did not commit any offence or wrong" against her.
The court noted, "The star witness of prosecution is completely hostile to the prosecution version. It is evident from her testimony that she did not depose anything incriminating against any of the accused and denied all the suggestions regarding the alleged trafficking/ confinement."
It also recorded that the victim's husband, cited as a material witness, could not be examined as he had died during the course of the trial.
"In view of the hostile testimony (of complainant), the whole prosecution version crumbles and nothing survives thereafter," the court said.
"It stands not proved that any offence got committed against the victim or the same was committed by the accused," it added, acquitting both accused of all charges.
