Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Ashpak Lalmohammad Mohammad Ansari, was convicted under Section 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code for gang rape and sentenced to ten years' rigorous imprisonment by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kalyan. The incident occurred on June 21, 2011, at Kalyan Railway Station. The prosecutrix, a 17-year-old college student, had left home after a quarrel with her parents and went to Pune to meet her boyfriend. On her return, she alleged that she was raped by three men, including the appellant. The High Court, on appeal, examined the evidence and found the prosecutrix's testimony to be inconsistent and unreliable. The medical evidence did not corroborate the allegations of forcible sexual assault. The court noted that the prosecutrix had changed her version regarding the identity of the accused and the manner of the incident. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and granted the benefit of doubt to the appellant. The conviction and sentence were set aside, and the appellant was ordered to be released forthwith unless required in any other case.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Gang Rape - Section 376(2)(g) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Testimony of Prosecutrix - The court examined the reliability of the prosecutrix's testimony in a gang rape case. The prosecutrix's evidence was found to be inconsistent and contradictory, particularly regarding the identity of the accused and the sequence of events. The court held that the testimony of the prosecutrix must be scrutinized with care and caution, and if it is found to be unreliable, the accused is entitled to acquittal. (Paras 4-10) B) Criminal Law - Medical Evidence - Corroboration - Section 376(2)(g) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The medical evidence did not support the prosecution case as the injuries on the prosecutrix were not consistent with forcible sexual assault. The court held that medical evidence is an important piece of corroboration in rape cases, and its absence or inconsistency weakens the prosecution case. (Paras 11-13) C) Criminal Law - Benefit of Doubt - Acquittal - Section 376(2)(g) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Due to the unreliable testimony of the prosecutrix and lack of corroborative evidence, the court granted the benefit of doubt to the appellant and set aside the conviction. The court emphasized that the prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 14-15)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant are set aside. The appellant is acquitted of the offence under Section 376(2)(g) IPC and shall be released forthwith unless required in any other case.
Law Points
- Gang rape
- Section 376(2)(g) IPC
- Testimony of prosecutrix
- Corroboration
- Medical evidence
- Inconsistencies
- Benefit of doubt
