Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Anil Kisan Barde, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Baramati, for the offence of rape under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and sentenced to seven years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 10,000. The incident occurred on 10 February 2008, when the prosecutrix, a minor girl studying in the VIIth standard, went to collect grass from a sugarcane field. The accused, who overheard her informing her cousin Dadu about her destination, followed her, pressed her mouth, took her inside the standing sugarcane crop, and raped her, causing her to lose consciousness. She was found the next morning by her father and relatives. The prosecutrix lodged an FIR on 11 February 2008 at Yavat Police Station. The trial court convicted the accused, leading to this appeal. The appellant's counsel argued that the prosecutrix's testimony was unreliable, that the cousin Dadu was not examined, and that there were contradictions in the evidence. The State supported the conviction. The High Court examined the evidence, noting that the prosecutrix's testimony was consistent and credible, and that the delay in filing the FIR was explained by her unconscious state and the search by her parents. The court held that the non-examination of Dadu was not fatal as the prosecutrix's evidence was sufficient. The court also noted that the absence of medical evidence did not affect the case. The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction and sentence were upheld.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape - Section 376 IPC - Conviction based on sole testimony of prosecutrix - The court held that the testimony of the prosecutrix was trustworthy and inspired confidence, and minor contradictions or non-examination of a cousin did not discredit her evidence - The conviction was upheld (Paras 7-12). B) Criminal Procedure - Delay in FIR - Section 154 CrPC - Delay explained by prosecutrix's unconsciousness and search by parents - The court held that the delay was satisfactorily explained and did not affect the prosecution case (Para 8). C) Evidence Law - Medical Evidence - Not mandatory in rape cases - The court held that absence of medical evidence does not vitiate conviction if oral evidence is credible (Para 11).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 376 IPC based on the testimony of the prosecutrix is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed. Conviction and sentence under Section 376 IPC upheld.
Law Points
- Testimony of prosecutrix in rape cases is credible if it inspires confidence
- minor contradictions do not discredit
- non-examination of independent witness not fatal if evidence is reliable
- delay in FIR not fatal if explained
- medical evidence not mandatory for conviction
