Case Note & Summary
The State of Gujarat filed an appeal under Section 378(1) and (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the judgment dated 25.04.2003 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.2, Jamnagar in Sessions Case No.37 of 1997, whereby the respondent Jayantilal Nanjibhai Nakum was acquitted of the charges under Sections 376 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The case pertains to an incident that occurred on 19.09.1996 at about 11:00 p.m. in Village Kunnud, Taluka Jodiya, District Jamnagar. The prosecutrix, Rasilaben, alleged that while she was sleeping outside her house, the accused threatened her and forcibly took her to his house where he committed rape against her will. She further alleged that he threatened to kill her if she reported the incident. Her husband saw her coming out of the accused's house and inquired about the matter, leading to the filing of the FIR. The trial court, after examining the evidence, found material contradictions in the testimony of the prosecutrix and lack of corroboration, and acquitted the accused. The High Court, in the present appeal, examined the scope of interference in appeals against acquittal and held that unless the findings are perverse or based on no evidence, the appellate court should not interfere. The court noted that the prosecutrix's testimony was inconsistent regarding the time of the incident, the place where the rape occurred, and her conduct after the incident. The court also observed that the medical evidence did not support the prosecution case. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the acquittal.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape - Acquittal Appeal - Section 378 CrPC - Standard of Review - Appeal against acquittal under Section 378(1) & (3) CrPC - Court held that unless the findings of the trial court are perverse or based on no evidence, the appellate court should not interfere with the acquittal - The prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt due to material contradictions in the evidence of the prosecutrix and lack of corroboration (Paras 1-15). B) Criminal Law - Rape - Testimony of Prosecutrix - Section 376 IPC - Corroboration - The prosecutrix's testimony was found to be unreliable due to contradictions regarding the time of incident, place of occurrence, and conduct after the incident - Held that in the absence of corroboration, the accused is entitled to benefit of doubt (Paras 5-12). C) Criminal Law - Criminal Intimidation - Section 506(2) IPC - Acquittal - The charge of criminal intimidation was also not proved as the alleged threat was part of the same transaction and the evidence was inconsistent - Held that the acquittal under Section 506(2) IPC is also sustainable (Paras 13-15).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned trial court for offences under Sections 376 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 is perverse and liable to be set aside.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.2, Jamnagar in Sessions Case No.37 of 1997.
Law Points
- Acquittal appeal under Section 378 CrPC
- standard of review in appeals against acquittal
- presumption of innocence
- corroboration of prosecutrix testimony
- material contradictions
- Section 376 IPC
- Section 506(2) IPC
