Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Girjesh Rajendra Prasad, was convicted by the Second Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Kalyan, in Sessions Case No.161/2004 for the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(f) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced to 10 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1000/-. The appeal challenged this conviction. The case arose from an incident on 28th April 2004, when the step-daughter of the complainant Smt. Ashadevi Rathod returned home weeping with blood on her legs. The complainant alleged that the appellant had raped the victim. However, the High Court found that the victim's testimony was inconsistent with the medical evidence, which did not support rape. The court also noted that the prosecution witnesses gave contradictory statements. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt beyond reasonable doubt and therefore set aside the conviction and acquitted the appellant.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape - Section 376(2)(f) IPC - Inconsistent Evidence - The appellant was convicted for rape of a minor step-daughter, but the victim's testimony was inconsistent with medical evidence and other witnesses - The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt - Held that conviction cannot be sustained (Paras 1-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 376(2)(f) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 is sustainable in light of inconsistent evidence and lack of corroboration.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The conviction and sentence are set aside. The appellant is acquitted of the offence under Section 376(2)(f) IPC. He is directed to be released forthwith unless required in any other case.
Law Points
- Rape
- Section 376(2)(f) IPC
- Inconsistent evidence
- Medical evidence
- Corroboration
- Benefit of doubt
