Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Shamlal s/o Punaram Achale, was convicted by the II Additional Sessions Judge, Bhandara in Sessions Trial 139/2001 for offences under Sections 452 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). He was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs.1,000 for Section 452, and rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs.2,000 for Section 376. The case arose from an oral report dated 5 November 2001 (Exhibit 17) lodged by the prosecutrix (P.W.1), then aged 12 years, alleging that on 4 November 2001, while she was sleeping in her house, the accused entered, pressed her mouth, carried her to a neighbour's verandah, and forcibly raped her. The prosecution examined the prosecutrix, her mother, a neighbour, and medical witnesses. The trial court convicted the appellant. On appeal, the High Court examined the evidence and found material inconsistencies. The prosecutrix's testimony varied regarding the time of the incident, whether her brother was present, and the location of the assault. Medical evidence did not confirm rape, as no injuries were found on the prosecutrix or the accused. The neighbour (P.W.3) did not support the prosecution. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, and the conviction was based on unreliable testimony. The appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the appellant was acquitted.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape - Corroboration - Inconsistencies in Testimony - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 376, 452 - The appellant was convicted for rape and house trespass. The prosecutrix's testimony contained material inconsistencies regarding the time of incident, presence of witnesses, and medical evidence. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, and the benefit of doubt must be given to the accused. (Paras 1-10) B) Evidence Law - Child Witness - Reliability - Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Section 118 - The prosecutrix, aged 12 years, was a child witness. Her testimony was found to be inconsistent and not corroborated by medical evidence or other witnesses. The court held that the conviction cannot be based solely on such unreliable testimony. (Paras 5-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Sections 452 and 376 IPC is sustainable based on the evidence of the prosecutrix and other witnesses.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The judgment and order dated 17 March 2003 passed by the II Additional Sessions Judge, Bhandara in Sessions Trial 139/2001 is set aside. The appellant is acquitted of the offences under Sections 376 and 452 IPC. The bail bonds stand cancelled.
Law Points
- Rape
- Corroboration
- Child Witness
- Inconsistencies
- Benefit of Doubt
