Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Rape Case Due to Inconsistent Evidence on Age of Victim. Consent of Victim Above 16 Years Renders Sexual Intercourse Not Rape Under Section 376 IPC.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: NAGPUR In Favour of Accused
  • 3
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appellant, Ashok Pande, was convicted under Section 376 IPC for rape of a minor girl, Latiba (PW2), and sentenced to seven years rigorous imprisonment. The appeal challenged the conviction on the ground that the victim was above 16 years and the relationship was consensual. The High Court noted that the only evidence of age was a transfer certificate from a government school showing date of birth as 15-6-1997, but the incident occurred on 31-7-1993, making her 16 years 1 month 16 days old. However, the court held that the transfer certificate, though admissible under Section 35 of the Evidence Act, has little evidentiary value unless the person who made the entry or gave the date of birth is examined. Since no such witness was examined, the prosecution failed to prove that the victim was below 16 years. Consequently, the consent of the victim, who was above 16, was a valid defence. The court also noted that the fact of sexual intercourse was not disputed. Therefore, the conviction was set aside and the appellant was acquitted.

Headnote

A) Criminal Law - Rape - Age of Victim - Proof - Section 376 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The prosecution failed to prove that the victim was below 16 years of age as the transfer certificate was not supported by examination of the person who recorded the entry or the person who gave the date of birth - Held that the transfer certificate has little evidentiary value without such examination (Paras 3-5).

B) Evidence Act - Admissibility of Documents - Section 35 Evidence Act, 1872 - Transfer certificate from a government school is admissible but its evidentiary value is limited unless the source of the entry is proved - Held that the date of birth in the transfer certificate cannot be relied upon without examining the person who made the entry or gave the date of birth (Paras 4-5).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the prosecution proved that the victim was below 16 years of age at the time of the incident, and whether the sexual relationship was consensual.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted of offence under Section 376 IPC.

Law Points

  • Age of victim must be proved beyond reasonable doubt
  • Transfer certificate without examining source has little evidentiary value
  • Consent of victim above 16 years is valid defence in rape case
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2018 LawText (BOM) (01) 145

Criminal Appeal No. 498 of 2012

2018-01-04

Rohit B. Deo

Shri C.H. and A.C. Jaltare for appellant, Shri P.S. Tembhare for respondent

Ashok s/o Vinayakrao Pande

State of Maharashtra

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal appeal against conviction for rape under Section 376 IPC.

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought acquittal from conviction and sentence.

Filing Reason

Appellant was convicted for rape of a minor girl; he appealed on grounds that the victim was above 16 and relationship was consensual.

Previous Decisions

Trial court convicted appellant and sentenced to 7 years RI and fine of Rs. 5,000.

Issues

Whether the prosecution proved that the victim was below 16 years of age at the time of the incident. Whether the sexual relationship was consensual.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the victim was above 16 years and the relationship was consensual, relying on Alamelu case that transfer certificate without examining source has little evidentiary value. Prosecution argued that the transfer certificate proved the victim was below 16, making consent irrelevant.

Ratio Decidendi

The prosecution must prove the age of the victim beyond reasonable doubt. A transfer certificate is admissible under Section 35 of the Evidence Act but has little evidentiary value unless the person who made the entry or gave the date of birth is examined. In absence of such proof, the benefit of doubt goes to the accused.

Judgment Excerpts

The transfer certificate would have no evidentiary value unless the person, who made the entry or who gave the date of birth is examined. The fact that the accused established sexual relationship with P.W.2 Latiba is not in dispute.

Procedural History

Trial court convicted appellant on 25-10-2012 in Session Trial 42/2011. Appellant filed Criminal Appeal No. 498 of 2012 in Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench. Judgment reserved on 21-11-2017 and pronounced on 04-01-2018.

Acts & Sections

  • Indian Penal Code, 1860: 376
  • Indian Evidence Act, 1872: 35
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Allows Revision Petition by State Against Order Rejecting Application to Recall Witnesses in Spl.C. No.828/2018 — Held That Trial Court Erred in Holding That Recall Application Was Not Maintainable After Commencement of Tria...
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Dismisses State Appeal Against Acquittal in SC/ST Atrocities Case — Prosecution Fails to Prove Caste-Based Insult and Assault Beyond Reasonable Doubt. The Court upheld the trial court's finding that the essential ingredients...