Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Bandu Hasan Tamobli, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge at Karad in Sessions Case No.56 of 2000 for offences under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 3(2)(v), 3(1)(x), and 3(1)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The prosecution case was that the appellant raped the complainant, Mangal Govind Bhise, a married woman belonging to a Scheduled Caste, on multiple occasions and also insulted her caste. The trial court convicted the appellant, and he appealed to the Bombay High Court. The High Court examined the evidence, including the testimony of the prosecutrix (PW-1), her husband Govind (PW-7), and medical evidence. The court found material inconsistencies in the prosecutrix's version, contradictions with her husband's testimony, and lack of corroboration from medical evidence. The medical report did not show any signs of recent sexual intercourse or injuries. The court also noted that the allegations under the SC/ST Act were not substantiated as there was no evidence of caste-based insults in public view. Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction, and acquitted the appellant, giving him the benefit of doubt.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape - Section 376 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Corroboration of Testimony - The conviction for rape cannot be sustained when the prosecutrix's testimony is inconsistent, uncorroborated by medical evidence, and contradicted by other prosecution witnesses. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the offence beyond reasonable doubt (Paras 1-10). B) Atrocities Law - Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Sections 3(2)(v), 3(1)(x), 3(1)(xi) - Ingredients of Offence - The allegations of caste-based insults and atrocities must be proved with specific evidence of intent and public view. In this case, the evidence was insufficient to establish the offences under the Act (Paras 1-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant is guilty of rape under Section 376 IPC and offences under Sections 3(2)(v), 3(1)(x), 3(1)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction set aside. Appellant acquitted of all charges.
Law Points
- Rape conviction requires corroboration of victim's testimony
- Inconsistencies in prosecution case lead to benefit of doubt
- Medical evidence must support allegations of sexual assault
- SC/ST Act provisions require specific intent and public view
