Case Note & Summary
The case involves two appeals by convicts Ananda Sawant and Kunal Gaikwad against their conviction by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhokar in Special Case (POCSO) No. 3/2019 for offences under Sections 376(2)(i), 376-D, 452, 506 r/w 34 IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act. The prosecution alleged that on 26.11.2018 at around 1:00 a.m., three persons forcibly entered the house of the victim, threatened her mother with a knife, and raped the victim. The trial court convicted accused nos. 1 and 2 (appellants) while acquitting accused no. 3. The High Court examined the evidence, particularly the testimony of the victim (PW1) and her mother (PW2). The court found material inconsistencies in the victim's deposition regarding the identity of the assailants, the sequence of events, and the presence of a knife. The victim initially stated that accused no. 1 raped her, but later claimed that accused no. 2 also raped her, and that accused no. 3 was present. However, her cross-examination revealed contradictions about who actually committed the rape. The mother's testimony also did not fully corroborate the victim's version. The court noted that the medical evidence did not support the allegation of rape as no injuries were found on the victim. The High Court held that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and the inconsistencies in the victim's testimony made it unsafe to sustain the conviction. Consequently, the appeals were allowed, the conviction was set aside, and the appellants were acquitted. The court directed that the appellants be released forthwith unless required in any other case.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape and Gang Rape - Sections 376(2)(i), 376-D, 452, 506 r/w 34 IPC and Section 6 POCSO Act - Conviction based on sole testimony of victim - Inconsistencies and contradictions in victim's evidence - Held that conviction cannot be sustained when the victim's testimony is inconsistent and lacks corroboration on material aspects (Paras 1-20).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellants under Sections 376(2)(i), 376-D, 452, 506 r/w 34 IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Appeals allowed. Conviction set aside. Appellants acquitted. They be released forthwith unless required in any other case.
Law Points
- Conviction requires proof beyond reasonable doubt
- Inconsistent testimony of victim cannot be sole basis for conviction
- Corroboration essential in sexual offence cases
- Benefit of doubt must be given to accused
