Youth jailed for 7 years for raping employer's minor sister

A youth has been sent to seven years in jail by a Delhi court for kidnapping and raping the minor sister of his employer in 2010.
Additional sessions judge T R Naval held 24-year-old Shahbuddin guilty of raping the 17-year-old girl but took a moderate view towards him in awarding the punishment.
"In view of the evidence on record, it is held that prosecution had proved that the accused (Shahbuddin) committed sexual intercourse with the girl against her will and without her consent," the court said.
"It would be just and appropriate if moderate view in sentence is taken. Accordingly the convict is sentenced to rigorous imprisonment of seven years under section 376 (rape) IPC," the judge said as Shahbuddin sought leniency on the ground that he has to support his wife and a child.

The court also imposed a fine of Rs 17,000 on the convict, a resident of Ghaziabad, and said if the amount is realised, Rs 10,000 be given to the victim as compensation. The court said that besides this, she will also be entitled for other compensation, if available to her under other laws.
A complaint was filed by the victim's brother at Shahdara police station that his sister has been kidnapped by the accused when she, his wife and two children had gone to Mandoli road market to buy vegetables.

He told the police that Shahbuddin terrorised his wife and kidnapped his sister, who was studying in class X at the time of the incident on May 26, 2010.

The girl was recovered on May 28, 2010 and the accused surrendered on July 13, 2010.
The victim told the court that Shahbuddin, who was known to her, forcibly took her to Pilakwa in Ghaziabad and confined her in his house and forcibly had physical relations with her.
During the trial, Shahbuddin claimed he was innocent and said he was a tailor and was working in the shop of the girl's brother. He said she fell in love with him and used to pressurise him for marriage.
He also said that the girl's brother was against it and he falsely implicated him in the case.

The court, however, said "There is no evidence on record showing any motive or reason for the girl or her brother or sister-in-law to depose against the accused particularly when he was their employee unless he committed the offence.