Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Santosh Deelip Shinde, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Gangakhed, for offenses under Sections 376 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for allegedly raping a physically handicapped and speech-impaired woman on 27 January 2013. The prosecution alleged that when the prosecutrix was alone at her house, the accused forcibly had sexual intercourse with her, and two women, Gavlanbai and Khobrabai, arrived on hearing her shouts but the accused fled. The FIR was lodged on 2 February 2013, six days after the incident. The trial court convicted the appellant, sentencing him to ten years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 376 and three months' simple imprisonment under Section 323. The appellant appealed to the Bombay High Court. The High Court examined the evidence, noting that the prosecutrix's testimony was inconsistent and contradictory. The medical evidence did not indicate any signs of rape, and the delay in lodging the FIR was not satisfactorily explained. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction, and acquitted the appellant of all charges.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape - Conviction based on sole testimony of prosecutrix - Reliability - Prosecutrix was physically handicapped and speech impaired - Her testimony was inconsistent and contradictory - Medical evidence did not support rape - Held that conviction cannot be sustained when prosecutrix's evidence is unreliable and not corroborated by medical evidence (Paras 1-10). B) Criminal Procedure - Delay in FIR - Unexplained delay of 6 days - Prosecutrix's mother did not explain delay - Held that delay in lodging FIR creates doubt about veracity of prosecution case (Paras 5-6). C) Evidence Act - Appreciation of Evidence - Contradictions and omissions - Material contradictions between FIR and trial testimony - Held that such contradictions render prosecution case doubtful (Paras 7-9).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Sections 376 and 323 of IPC is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted of all charges.
Law Points
- Rape conviction requires reliable and consistent testimony of prosecutrix
- corroboration by medical evidence
- delay in FIR must be satisfactorily explained
- benefit of doubt to accused if prosecution fails to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt
