Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Kishor Nagorao Dahake, was convicted by the Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Achalpur in Sessions Trial No. 29 of 2008 for offences under Sections 452 (house-trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint) and 376 (rape) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). He was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years and a fine of Rs. 200 for the first count, and rigorous imprisonment for seven years and a fine of Rs. 1000 for the second count. The prosecutrix was a 13-year-old mentally challenged girl, and the appellant was her neighbour. The prosecution alleged that on 12.10.2007, when the prosecutrix was alone at home, the appellant entered her house and committed rape. The mother of the prosecutrix lodged a report. The trial court convicted the appellant based primarily on the testimony of the prosecutrix. In appeal, the High Court examined the evidence. The court noted that the prosecutrix's testimony was inconsistent and unreliable. She initially stated that the appellant had sexual intercourse with her, but later contradicted herself. The medical evidence did not support rape; the doctor found no signs of recent sexual intercourse. The High Court held that the sole testimony of the prosecutrix, being unreliable, required corroboration, which was lacking. The court also noted that the appellant was a young man of 23 years and the incident was alleged to have occurred in a small house where the mother returned soon after. The court found the prosecution case doubtful and gave the benefit of doubt to the appellant. The appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the appellant was acquitted.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape - Mentally Challenged Victim - Corroboration - Sections 376, 452 IPC - Conviction based solely on testimony of mentally challenged prosecutrix requires careful scrutiny - Inconsistencies in her testimony and lack of corroboration by medical evidence led to acquittal - Held that when testimony is unreliable, benefit of doubt must be given (Paras 1-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Sections 452 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) based on the testimony of a mentally challenged prosecutrix is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted of all charges.
Law Points
- Conviction based on sole testimony of prosecutrix requires corroboration if testimony is unreliable
- Inconsistencies in evidence lead to benefit of doubt
- Medical evidence not supporting rape weakens prosecution case
