A court here held the woman executive raped by an Uber cab driver last year a "credible, truthful and trustworthy witness while convicting accused Shiv Kumar Yadav in the case.Additional Sessions Judge Kaveri Baweja on Tuesday convicted Yadav on charges of rape, causing grievous bodily harm and endangering the life of the woman, and other charges dealing with kidnapping, criminal intimidation and voluntarily causing hurt. The incident happened on the night of December 5, 2014, in the cab she hired to head back home in north Delhi's Inderlok area. Yadav drove the woman to an isolated place and raped her.In a detailed judgement running into 99 pages, the court has relied upon the statement of victim, other prosecution witnesses with scientific and medical evidence while holding Yadav guilty."I have no hesitation in holding that prosecutrix (victim) is a 'credible, truthful and trustworthy witness'. It may also be mentioned that minor variations pointed out by defence counsel during the course of arguments do not fall in the category of 'material contradictions' and cannot be said that to affect the case of the prosecution fatally," it said.
The court also observed that Yadav has also admitted that he has picked up the victim on the night of incident, and said from the testimony of victim, it stands proven that he had overpowered her and confined her in a cramped space i.e. on the rear seat of the cab.Relying on the statement of doctor, who had medically examined the victim after the incident, the court held that Yadav had endangered the woman's life while committing rape upon her by forcefully pressing the neck.The court also noted that victim's testimony clearly established that Yadav beat her and caused injuries on her lower lip, neck, breast, shoulder and back by scratching, which was also supported by the doctor's statement."It must be borne in mind that when the accused threatened victim by saying that he will insert 'saria' (iron rod) inside her body, she was reminded of gang rape of December 16, 2012 and thus the threat to perception was very much real in the mind of the prosecurtix at that point of time," the court said.