Case Note & Summary
The appellant, original informant, filed an appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the judgment and order of acquittal dated 28.11.2019 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Vaijapur, District Aurangabad in Sessions Case No. 25 of 2016. The respondent No.1, Mahesh Subhash Tambe, was acquitted of charges under Sections 376(2)(n) and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The prosecution case was that respondent No.1, residing in the same locality as the appellant, allegedly raped the prosecutrix on several occasions by issuing threats to kill her brother and expressing his desire to marry her. The prosecutrix finally lodged a complaint on 31.01.2015. After investigation, the accused was charge-sheeted and tried. The trial court acquitted the accused, leading to the present appeal by the informant. The appellant's counsel argued that the prosecutrix's testimony was inspiring confidence and was corroborated by her mother's testimony and medical evidence, and that the trial court failed to properly appreciate the evidence. The High Court, after scrutinizing the entire record, found that the prosecutrix's testimony (Exhibit-24) was inconsistent and contradictory. She claimed that the accused had forcible sexual intercourse with her in January 2015, but her mother (PW-2, Exhibit-33) stated that the incident occurred in 2014. The medical evidence did not support the allegation of rape. The court held that the sole testimony of the prosecutrix did not inspire confidence and that the trial court's acquittal was not perverse. The appeal was dismissed, and the acquittal was upheld.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape - Acquittal Appeal - Section 376(2)(n) IPC, Section 378 CrPC - Appeal against acquittal in a case of alleged repeated rape - Prosecutrix's testimony found inconsistent and lacking credibility - Medical evidence did not support rape - Held that the trial court's acquittal was not perverse and no interference warranted (Paras 1-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the judgment of acquittal passed by the trial court is perverse and liable to be set aside in appeal under Section 378 of CrPC.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The judgment and order of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Vaijapur in Sessions Case No. 25 of 2016 is confirmed.
Law Points
- Sole testimony of prosecutrix must inspire confidence
- Acquittal appeal under Section 378 CrPC
- Standard of proof in rape cases
- Corroboration of medical evidence
