Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Rajesh S/o Rajan Nair, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Shahada, for offences under Section 376(2)(m) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 6 read with 5 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act). The prosecution alleged that on 12-09-2016, the appellant, a tutor, sexually assaulted a 5th standard girl by making her stay back after tuition, removing her clothes, and attempting to penetrate her. The victim's mother lodged a complaint, and after investigation, the appellant was chargesheeted. The trial court found the charges proved and sentenced him to imprisonment and fine. The appellant appealed to the Bombay High Court, arguing false implication due to rivalry between educational institutions, tutoring of the victim, and material inconsistencies in the prosecution evidence. The High Court analyzed the evidence, noting that the medical report showed no signs of injury or penetration, contradicting the victim's claim. Additionally, there were inconsistencies between the victim's testimony and her mother's testimony regarding the time of the incident and the sequence of events. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, as the victim's testimony lacked corroboration and the medical evidence did not support the allegation of penetration. The court also noted lapses in the investigation. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the conviction was set aside, and the appellant was acquitted. The court directed his release unless required in any other case.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape - Section 376(2)(m) IPC - Corroboration - The court examined whether the testimony of the victim alone, without corroboration, can sustain a conviction for rape. Held that while the victim's testimony is given great weight, it must be reliable and consistent. In this case, material inconsistencies between the victim's and mother's testimony, and medical evidence contradicting the allegation of penetration, rendered the prosecution case doubtful. (Paras 1-10) B) Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Section 6 read with 5 - Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault - Medical Evidence - The court considered the medical report which showed no signs of injury or penetration, contradicting the victim's claim of attempted penetration. Held that medical evidence is crucial in such cases and its contradiction with oral testimony creates reasonable doubt. (Paras 5-8) C) Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 157 - Corroboration - The court noted that the mother's testimony (PW2) had contradictions with the victim's version regarding the time of incident and the sequence of events. Held that such inconsistencies weaken the prosecution's case and require corroboration which was lacking. (Paras 6-9)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 376(2)(m) IPC and Section 6 read with 5 of the POCSO Act is sustainable in light of material inconsistencies and lack of corroboration.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction set aside. Appellant acquitted. Bail bonds cancelled. Fine, if paid, to be refunded. Appellant to be released unless required in any other case.
Law Points
- Corroboration of victim testimony
- Medical evidence in sexual offences
- Inconsistencies in prosecution case
- Standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt
