Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Shivaji Motiram Rathod, was convicted by the District Judge-6 and Additional Sessions Judge, Thane, for offences under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years and two years respectively, with fines. The case of the prosecution was that the victim, a 5th standard student, was acquainted with the accused who worked as a driver with her maternal uncle. On 13th February 2007, the accused allegedly threatened to kill her father if she did not meet him the next day. On 14th February 2007, the victim met him at Vashigaon bus stop, and they went to Koparkhairane, then to a friend's house, and later to Alibag where the accused allegedly raped her in a hotel room. The victim returned home at 2:30 pm but only informed her mother on 9th March 2007, leading to the lodging of an FIR on the same day. The trial court convicted the accused. On appeal, the High Court examined the evidence, particularly the testimony of the victim (PW4). The court found material inconsistencies in her testimony, including contradictions regarding the date of the incident, the place of occurrence, and the sequence of events. The court also noted an unexplained delay of 23 days in lodging the FIR, which was not satisfactorily explained. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, and the conviction was based on uncorroborated and unreliable testimony. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the accused was acquitted.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape - Corroboration of Testimony - Sections 376, 506 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Conviction based solely on uncorroborated testimony of prosecutrix with material inconsistencies and unexplained delay in lodging FIR - Held that such testimony is unreliable and accused entitled to acquittal (Paras 5-11).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code is sustainable based on the evidence on record
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted of all charges.
Law Points
- Conviction for rape requires corroboration of victim's testimony in cases of material inconsistencies
- delay in lodging FIR unexplained
- benefit of doubt to accused
