Girl had accused’s name tattooed on her chest: Delhi High Court reduces rape convict’s sentence

The Delhi High Court has reduced the sentence of a man convicted of rape and kidnapping a 14-year-old girl after noting that she had his name tattooed on her chest and had voluntarily travelled with him to Manali.[Vakul Kapoor Vs State].Justice Vimal Kumar Yadav said the circumstances indicated that the two were in an “amorous relationship”, though the girl’s age meant that the relationship could not legally be recognised. Therefore, the Court held that the nearly two years and four months already undergone by the man in custody would be sufficient punishment.The Court particularly referred to the tattoos and the girl’s conduct.“Deep down somewhere, she must also be looking for answers and explanation for the tattoos and travel to Manali, etc,” the Court observed..The case arose from an incident in June 2009. The girl, then around 14, went missing from her home and travelled with the convict, who was around 18, first to Connaught Place and thereafter to Manali. They returned to Delhi two days later.The man was convicted in 2011 for offences under Sections 363 (kidnapping), 366 (kidnapping woman to compel her marriage) and 376 (rape) of the Indian Penal Code. In the appeal before the High Court, he ultimately confined his challenge to the sentence and did not question the conviction itself..The High Court noted that during her medical examination immediately after returning, the girl had given a version broadly consistent with the convict’s case. Her statement recorded by the police in the presence of her mother was also not against him. However, she subsequently made allegations against him in her statement recorded before a magistrate and during trial.The Court noted that the girl could not satisfactorily explain why she had the man’s name tattooed on her chest. The convict had similarly tattooed her name on his hand. It also observed that she had not raised any alarm during their journey.Justice Yadav said the girl’s age was ultimately the factor that operated against the convict and led to his criminal liability..The convict also relied on the Supreme Court’s recent observations calling for consideration of a “Romeo-Juliet clause” to protect genuine adolescent relationships involving persons with a small age gap from the rigours of child-protection laws.The Court further took into account that both the convict and the prosecutrix were now married to other persons, tht he had no criminal antecedents and the proceedings had continued for about 17 years.Sending him back to jail at this stage would be nothing short of a travesty of justice, the Court said..Therefore, it reduced the substantive sentence to the period already undergone while leaving the fine imposed on him unchanged..The coinvict was represented by advocate Saahila Lamba..The State was represented by Additional Public Prosecutor Raj Kumar. Advocates Astha and Megha Singh appeared for the prosecutrix..[Read Judgment]