Case Note & Summary
The case pertains to an appeal against the judgment of the 2nd Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Gadchiroli, in Sessions Case No.33 of 1996, convicting appellant no.1 Manohar Chouke under Sections 341 read with 34 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, and appellant no.2 Satyawan Dadmal under Section 376 read with 109 IPC. The prosecution alleged that on 18-10-1995, at about 11:00 am, the prosecutrix went to a stream near village Potgaon to wash clothes. While returning at around 12:00 hours, appellant no.2 came from bushes and went back, then appellant no.1 came, threw her clothes, gagged her with a towel, took her into bushes, removed her saree, and forcibly committed sexual intercourse. Appellant no.2 caught hold of her legs. The prosecutrix's bangles and necklace were broken, and her blouse was torn. After the incident, both appellants fled. The trial court convicted both appellants. The appellants challenged the conviction on grounds of material contradictions and lack of credible evidence. The High Court examined the evidence, noting that the prosecutrix's testimony contained significant contradictions and improvements. The medical evidence did not support rape, as no injuries were found on the prosecutrix or the accused, and the doctor opined that rape could not be confirmed. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The court allowed the appeal, set aside the convictions, and acquitted the appellants.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape - Conviction based on sole testimony of prosecutrix - Testimony must be reliable and trustworthy - Where the prosecutrix's evidence is full of material contradictions and improvements, and medical evidence does not support rape, conviction cannot be sustained - Held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt (Paras 4-8). B) Criminal Law - Abetment - Section 109 IPC - Abetment of rape requires active participation - Where the alleged abettor only caught hold of legs but no other overt act, and the prosecutrix's testimony is unreliable, conviction under Section 376 read with 109 IPC is not sustainable - Held that the evidence does not establish abetment (Paras 4-8). C) Criminal Law - Wrongful Restraint - Section 341 IPC - Conviction for wrongful restraint requires proof of obstruction - Where the incident of rape itself is not proved, the conviction for wrongful restraint also fails - Held that the conviction under Section 341 read with 34 IPC is set aside (Paras 4-8).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellants under Sections 376, 341 read with 34 and 376 read with 109 of the Indian Penal Code is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Convictions and sentences set aside. Appellants acquitted of all charges. Bail bonds cancelled.
Law Points
- Conviction for rape requires corroboration of prosecutrix's testimony if it is unreliable
- material contradictions in evidence lead to acquittal
- medical evidence not supporting rape allegation weakens prosecution case
- Section 376 IPC
- Section 341 IPC
- Section 109 IPC
