Supreme Court Allows Appeal, Acquits Appellant of Rape Charges Due to Lack of Credible Evidence. Conviction under Section 376 IPC set aside as the prosecutrix's testimony was found unreliable and contradictory.

In Favour of Accused
  • 0
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involved an appeal against the conviction of the appellant under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1861, for allegedly raping a minor girl. The appellant was initially convicted by the Sessions Judge and sentenced to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment. The prosecution's case was based on the testimony of the prosecutrix, who claimed she was abducted and raped by the appellant. The incident was said to have occurred between June 19 and June 25, 2009, when the prosecutrix was allegedly taken to various locations against her will. The appellant contended that he was falsely implicated due to a civil dispute with the prosecutrix's father. The trial court acquitted the appellant of the charge under Section 366 IPC, finding insufficient evidence of kidnapping or abduction, but convicted him under Section 376 IPC. The High Court upheld this conviction. The Supreme Court, however, found the prosecutrix's testimony inconsistent and lacking credibility, noting that she did not raise any alarm during the alleged abduction and had willingly accompanied the appellant. The court emphasized that the evidence did not support the claim of non-consent, leading to the conclusion that the conviction was not sustainable. Consequently, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, acquitting the appellant of the charges under Section 376 IPC.

Headnote

A) Criminal Law - Rape - Conviction under Section 376 IPC - Lack of Consent - Indian Penal Code, 1861, Section 376 - The court found that the prosecutrix's testimony was riddled with contradictions and did not inspire confidence, leading to the conclusion that the appellant did not commit rape. The conviction was set aside due to insufficient evidence proving lack of consent (Paras 30-30).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the conviction under Section 376 IPC was justified based on the evidence presented.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court set aside the conviction and sentence under Section 376 IPC, acquitting the appellant due to lack of credible evidence supporting the charge.

Law Points

  • Rape
  • Consent
  • Kidnapping
  • Abduction
  • Evidence
  • Credibility of Witnesses
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (SC) (09) 96

Criminal Appeal No. 203 of 2015

2026-09-25

Ujjal Bhuyan, Atul S. Chandurkar

2026 INSC 1054

Rajiv Kataria, Nupur Kumar

Paramjit Singh Bedi

State of Punjab

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal appeal against conviction for rape.

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought to overturn conviction and sentence.

Filing Reason

Conviction under Section 376 IPC was challenged.

Previous Decisions

The appellant was convicted by the Sessions Judge and the conviction was upheld by the High Court.

Issues

Credibility of the prosecutrix's testimony Validity of the conviction under Section 376 IPC

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the prosecutrix was a consenting party and there were contradictions in her testimony. State argued that the conviction was justified based on the evidence presented.

Ratio Decidendi

The court emphasized that a conviction for rape requires credible evidence of lack of consent, which was not established in this case.

Judgment Excerpts

The conviction and sentence of the appellant under Section 376 IPC by the learned Sessions Judge and affirmed by the High Court cannot be sustained. The testimony of the prosecutrix cannot be said to be credible and worthy of acceptance.

Procedural History

The appellant was convicted by the Sessions Judge on 01.06.2012, the conviction was upheld by the High Court on 12.09.2013, and the Supreme Court granted leave to appeal on 28.02.2014.

Acts & Sections

  • Indian Penal Code, 1861: Section 376, Section 363, Section 366A
  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Section 313
  • Evidence Act, 1872: Section 114A
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Quashes Order Allowing Additional Evidence in Regular Appeal Under Order XLI Rule 27 CPC — Failure to Satisfy Conditions for Production of Additional Documents at Appellate Stage. The appellate court's order allowing additio...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Appeal and Restores Arbitrator's Pre-Reference Interest Award in Arbitration Dispute. Arbitrator Possessed Jurisdiction to Award Interest for Pre-Reference Period Under Interest Act, 1978 After Its Enforcement.