Case Note & Summary
The State of Gujarat appealed against the acquittal of Jerabhai Lalabhai Thakore and another accused by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.2, Nadiad, in Sessions Case No. 155 of 1998. The accused were charged with rape under Section 376 read with Section 114 IPC and criminal intimidation under Section 506(2) read with Section 114 IPC. The prosecutrix, a resident of Venikui village, alleged that the accused took her to fields near her house over two years and committed sexual intercourse against her will, threatening her with dire consequences. She became pregnant, and on 25.11.1997, her mother noticed signs of pregnancy, leading to a complaint. The trial court acquitted the accused, leading to the present appeal under Section 378 CrPC. The State argued that the trial court failed to appreciate documentary evidence (Exh.24) showing the prosecutrix's date of birth as 10.10.1981, making her a minor at the time of the incident. However, the High Court noted that the prosecutrix herself stated she was 18 years old at the time of the incident, and the school register was not conclusive without an ossification test. The prosecutrix's testimony was found to be inconsistent and unreliable, and there was no corroboration. The High Court held that the trial court's findings were not perverse and dismissed the appeal, upholding the acquittal.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Acquittal Appeal - Standard of Review - Section 378 CrPC - The High Court in an appeal against acquittal will not interfere unless the findings of the trial court are perverse or based on no evidence. The presumption of innocence in favour of the accused is strengthened by acquittal. (Paras 1-10) B) Evidence Law - Age of Prosecutrix - School Register vs. Ossification Test - Sections 35, 45, 114 Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - The trial court's reliance on the absence of an ossification test to determine the age of the prosecutrix was justified, as the school register entry (Exh.24) was not conclusive and the prosecutrix's own testimony indicated she was above 18 years at the time of the incident. (Paras 3-8) C) Criminal Law - Rape - Testimony of Prosecutrix - Corroboration - Section 376 IPC - The testimony of the prosecutrix was found to be inconsistent and unreliable, and the trial court rightly required corroboration in the absence of independent evidence. The High Court upheld the acquittal as the prosecutrix's version was not trustworthy. (Paras 5-9)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court's acquittal of the accused for offences under Sections 376, 506(2) read with Section 114 IPC was perverse and against the evidence on record, particularly regarding the age of the prosecutrix and the reliability of her testimony.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the acquittal of the respondents-accused.
Law Points
- Acquittal appeal under Section 378 CrPC
- standard of review in acquittal appeals
- age of prosecutrix in rape cases
- reliability of prosecutrix testimony
- corroboration requirement
- school register as proof of age
- ossification test for age determination
