Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Chandya Shravan Naik, was convicted by the Trial Court for an offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to seven years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500. The prosecution case was that on 2/6/2002, the accused took the prosecutrix to a forest on the pretext of giving her mangoes and committed rape. The prosecutrix returned home, informed her mother, who took her to the hospital, and a complaint was lodged at Alibag Police Station. The accused was arrested and charge-sheeted. The Trial Court convicted the appellant. The appellant appealed to the High Court. The High Court examined the evidence of P.W.1 (mother of prosecutrix) and P.W.3 (prosecutrix). The mother in her cross-examination admitted that the incident occurred one day before the date mentioned in the FIR, i.e., 1/6/2002, while the prosecutrix stated it was on 2/6/2002. The medical evidence did not support the allegation of rape as there were no injuries on the prosecutrix or the accused. The High Court found that the inconsistencies in the prosecution evidence were material and that the conviction was not sustainable. The court held that the appellant was entitled to the benefit of doubt and acquitted him of all charges.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape - Section 376 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Conviction based on uncorroborated testimony of prosecutrix and mother - Inconsistencies in their statements regarding date and time of incident - Mother admitted in cross-examination that incident occurred one day before the date mentioned in FIR - Prosecutrix stated incident occurred on 2/6/2002 but mother said it was a day earlier - Medical evidence did not support rape - No injuries on prosecutrix or accused - Held that conviction cannot be sustained and appellant is entitled to benefit of doubt (Paras 1-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code is sustainable in light of inconsistencies in the prosecution evidence and lack of corroboration.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted of all charges. Fine, if paid, to be refunded.
Law Points
- Rape
- Section 376 IPC
- Corroboration
- Inconsistencies in evidence
- Benefit of doubt
- Acquittal
