Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Udhavsingh @ Mannu Kisansing Babawale, was convicted by the VIth Additional Sessions Judge, Solapur, for the offence of rape under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to 7 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.5,000/-. The incident allegedly occurred on the night of 22nd November 1985, when the prosecutrix, a 21-year-old woman about to be married, went to the appellant's house to get henna applied. She stayed overnight at the insistence of the appellant's mother. According to the prosecutrix, at around 3 to 3:30 a.m., the appellant woke her up, dragged her to his bed, and forcibly had sexual intercourse with her, causing severe bleeding. The next morning, she went to a public toilet, noticed bleeding, and was taken to a hospital where she disclosed the incident, leading to an FIR. The appellant was charged and convicted. On appeal, the High Court examined the evidence, including the testimony of the prosecutrix, medical evidence, and other witnesses. The court found several inconsistencies and improbabilities in the prosecutrix's version. For instance, she claimed to have been dragged from a cot to a bed on the floor without waking the child sleeping next to her, and she did not raise an alarm despite other family members being nearby. The medical evidence showed that the prosecutrix was used to sexual intercourse and that the injuries could have been caused by other means. The court also noted that the prosecutrix's conduct after the incident, such as going to a public toilet and not immediately reporting the rape, was inconsistent with her claim of forcible intercourse. The court concluded that the prosecution had failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt and that the conviction was unsustainable. The appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the appellant was acquitted.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape - Section 376 IPC - Testimony of Prosecutrix - Corroboration - The court examined whether the uncorroborated testimony of the prosecutrix was sufficient to sustain a conviction for rape. Held that while the testimony of a prosecutrix in a rape case may be acted upon without corroboration, it must be reliable and inspire confidence. In this case, the prosecutrix's testimony was found to be inconsistent and improbable, and the medical evidence did not support her version of forcible intercourse. The court set aside the conviction and acquitted the appellant. (Paras 1-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code for rape is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The conviction and sentence passed by the VIth Additional Sessions Judge, Solapur, are set aside. The appellant is acquitted of the offence under Section 376 IPC. His bail bonds stand cancelled.
Law Points
- Rape
- Section 376 IPC
- Corroboration
- Testimony of prosecutrix
- Medical evidence
- Inconsistencies
- Acquittal
