Case Note & Summary
The case involves an appeal against the conviction of two appellants, Sudhakar Domaji Hazare and Prafulla @ Pravin Anandrao Sangidwar, under Section 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for gang rape. The incident allegedly occurred on January 17, 1996, in village Antargaon, District Chandrapur. The prosecutrix, Vandana, was at home with her children while her husband was out. She claimed that around 8:00-8:30 PM, while she was resting, two persons entered her house and committed rape on her. She stated that she recognized the accused as they were from the same village. The trial court convicted the appellants and sentenced them to three years rigorous imprisonment and a fine. On appeal, the High Court examined the evidence. The court noted that the prosecutrix's testimony was inconsistent: she did not name the accused in the FIR, and there were contradictions regarding the time of the incident and the presence of her daughter. The medical evidence did not show any injuries or corroborate rape. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, and the conviction was based on weak and unreliable evidence. The appeal was allowed, and the appellants were acquitted.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Gang Rape - Section 376(2)(g) IPC - Conviction based on sole testimony of prosecutrix - The court examined whether the uncorroborated testimony of the prosecutrix was sufficient to sustain a conviction for gang rape. The court found material inconsistencies and contradictions in the prosecutrix's evidence, including her failure to name the accused in the FIR and discrepancies regarding the time of the incident. The medical evidence did not support the prosecution case. Held that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and the appellants were entitled to acquittal (Paras 4-8).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellants under Section 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) based on the sole testimony of the prosecutrix is sustainable in the absence of corroborative evidence and in light of inconsistencies.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chandrapur in Sessions Trial No.61 of 1996 dated 04-07-2003 is quashed and set aside. The appellants are acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code. Their bail bonds stand cancelled.
Law Points
- Gang rape
- Section 376(2)(g) IPC
- Conviction based on sole testimony of prosecutrix
- Necessity of corroboration
- Inconsistencies in evidence
- Benefit of doubt
