Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Gorakshya Arjun Mahakal, was convicted by the Special Judge (POCSO), Kalyan, for offences punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine. The case of the prosecution was that on 21st December 2013, the prosecutrix, a minor aged about 16 years, lodged a report alleging that the appellant, who was her friend, took her on his motorcycle to various places, proposed to her, and later checked into a hotel room where he committed rape. The prosecutrix testified that the appellant had sexual intercourse with her without her consent. However, during cross-examination, she admitted that she went with the appellant voluntarily and that they were in a relationship. The medical evidence did not show any signs of recent sexual activity, and the FSL report was inconclusive. The appellant contended that the prosecutrix was a consenting party and that the relationship was consensual. The court observed that the prosecutrix's testimony was full of contradictions and improvements, and her conduct of not raising any alarm or reporting the matter immediately cast doubt on the prosecution's case. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. The appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the appellant was acquitted.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape - Section 376 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Consent of Minor - The prosecutrix, a minor, alleged rape but her testimony was inconsistent and uncorroborated. The court held that while consent of a minor is irrelevant, the prosecution must still prove the act of sexual intercourse beyond reasonable doubt. Inconsistencies in the victim's statement and lack of medical or other evidence led to acquittal. (Paras 1-11) B) Criminal Law - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences - Section 4 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault - The appellant was convicted under Section 4 of POCSO Act. The court found that the prosecutrix's testimony was not reliable due to contradictions and improvements, and the medical evidence did not support the allegation. Hence, the conviction was set aside. (Paras 1-11)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 376 of IPC and Section 4 of POCSO Act is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted.
Law Points
- Consent of minor is no consent
- Inconsistent testimony of prosecutrix
- Benefit of doubt
- Acquittal in rape and POCSO cases
