Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Dnyaneshwar Digambar Telang, was convicted by the Sessions Judge, Yavatmal, for an offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years and a fine of Rs.500. The conviction was based on the oral report of the prosecutrix, a 15-year-old girl, who alleged that on 17.07.2012, between 5:30 to 6:00 p.m., she went to a grocery shop to purchase a watch cell. Upon being informed that cells were not available, she was returning home when the accused, sitting in front of his house, offered her a cell from his residence. When she approached, he pushed her inside, removed her clothes, gagged her, threatened her, and raped her. After the incident, she ran towards a field, met Akshay Meshram, who helped her, and she later disclosed the incident to her parents and lodged a report. The appellant appealed against the conviction. The High Court heard arguments from both sides. The court noted several inconsistencies in the prosecutrix's testimony: she initially stated she went to the shop alone but later admitted her sister was with her; she claimed the accused gagged her but also said she raised an alarm; she stated she was made to lie on a cot but medical evidence showed no injuries; the medical report did not confirm rape; and the witnesses, including Akshay Meshram, did not support the prosecution case. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the appellant was acquitted.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape - Section 376 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Conviction based on prosecutrix's testimony - Inconsistencies and contradictions in the testimony of the prosecutrix, coupled with medical evidence not supporting rape and lack of corroboration from independent witnesses, render the conviction unsustainable - Held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt (Paras 1-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 376 IPC is sustainable in light of inconsistencies in the prosecutrix's testimony, lack of corroboration, and medical evidence not supporting rape
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted.
Law Points
- Conviction under Section 376 IPC requires corroboration of prosecutrix's testimony in case of inconsistencies
- medical evidence not supporting rape
- and contradictions in witness accounts
