Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Sanjay s/o Shriram Gondchar, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Achalpur, in Sessions Case No.119/2006 for offences under Sections 376 (rape) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. He was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment of 5 years and a fine of Rs.1,000 for rape, and 6 months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.200 for criminal intimidation. The appellant, a teacher, was accused of raping a 16-year-old student (prosecutrix) in the school science laboratory in 2004 and again on 5.3.2006 at a friend's house. The prosecutrix reported the matter to her parents on 6.3.2006, and an FIR was lodged on 7.3.2006. The trial court convicted the appellant based on the testimony of the prosecutrix. On appeal, the Bombay High Court examined the evidence. The prosecutrix's testimony contained inconsistencies and improvements. The medical evidence did not show any signs of forcible sexual intercourse. The delay in filing the FIR was not satisfactorily explained. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentences were set aside, and the appellant was acquitted.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape - Conviction based on sole testimony of prosecutrix - Reliability - The court examined whether the testimony of the prosecutrix (PW1) was trustworthy and consistent. The prosecutrix claimed rape by her teacher in 2004 and again on 5.3.2006, but her evidence contained contradictions and improvements. The medical evidence did not support forcible sexual intercourse. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt (Paras 1-10). B) Criminal Law - Delay in FIR - Unexplained delay - The FIR was lodged on 7.3.2006, two days after the alleged incident on 5.3.2006, and over two years after the first incident in 2004. The delay was not satisfactorily explained, casting doubt on the prosecution's case (Paras 5-6). C) Criminal Law - Section 376 IPC - Rape - Age of prosecutrix - The prosecutrix was aged about 16 years at the time of the incident. However, the court did not rely on the age factor as the evidence was insufficient to prove the offence (Para 2).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Achalpur in Sessions Case No.119/2006 is set aside. The appellant is acquitted of the offences under Sections 376 and 506 IPC. The appellant is directed to be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in any other case.
Law Points
- Rape conviction requires reliable and consistent testimony of prosecutrix
- corroboration by medical evidence
- delay in FIR filing
- absence of independent witnesses
