SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
RANJAN GOGOI, NAVIN SINHA, K.M. JOSEPH, JJ.
Jayantibhai Mohanbhai Patel (Padaria) – Appellant(s)
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent(s)
Criminal Appeal No(s). 341 of 2016
Decided on : 12-09-2018
Reasonable Doubt - Conviction under Section 376(2)(a)(i) and 452 IPC - FSL report creates reasonable doubt - Benefit of doubt accorded to accused appellant
Fact of the Case:
The accused appellant was acquitted by the trial court but convicted by the High Court under Section 376(2)(a)(i) and 452 IPC. The victim implicated the accused, but medical evidence did not conclusively support the charge of rape. The FSL report created reasonable doubt, leading to the benefit of doubt being accorded to the accused appellant, resulting in acquittal.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the FSL report created a reasonable doubt as to the accused's liability for the alleged offence, and therefore, the benefit of doubt was accorded to the accused, resulting in acquittal.
Issues: The key issue was the reliability of the evidence, including the victim's testimony, medical evidence, and the FSL report, in determining the accused's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Ratio Decidendi: The FSL report creating a reasonable doubt, along with inconclusive medical evidence, led the court to accord the benefit of doubt to the accused, resulting in acquittal.
Final Decision: The accused appellant was acquitted of the offence on the benefit of reasonable doubt, and the order of the High Court was set aside, allowing the appeal.
ORDER
1. The accused appellant who had been acquitted by the learned trial Court of the charge under Sections 376, 323, 504 and 451 IPC has been convicted by the High Court under Section 376(2)(a)(i) and 452 IPC and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for ten years in appeal filed by the State.
2. We have heard the learned counsels for the parties. We have perused the materials on record including the evidence of the victim; the medical evidence as well as the report of the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL).
3. The victim clearly implicates the accused appellant and in her long deposition she has narrated the incident giving full details. However, the medical evidence seems to be negatived insofar as commission of the offence of rape is concerned. In fact, according to the Medical Officer, there was no evidence of any physical mark or injury on the private parts or on the chest of the victim. The fact that the victim was a married lady having three children is something that cannot be altogether ignored while considering the medical report. However, what, according to us, would turn the scales in favour of the accused is the FSL report which includes analysis of samples of blood, saliva, vaginal smear of the victim as well as of the accused.
4. In this regard, we must take note of the Health Card (Exhibit 86) of the accused appellant issued by the State Authority which certified that the blood group of the accused appellant is B+ve. In the absence of any other material on record we do not see any reason why we should not accept the Health Card issued by a competent Government Authority.
5. Proceeding on that basis we find that the blood Group AB of the appellant mentioned in the FSL report as against the samples of blood, saliva of both the accused and the victim defies a logical explanation. The analysis of the vaginal smear also discloses an inconclusive result which again defies explanation.
6. The result of the analysis of the samples sent to the FSL creates a reasonable doubt in the mind of the Court as to whether it is the accused alone who is liable for the offence alleged. Taking into account the same and also the medical report exhibited through P.W.14 - Medical Officer (Dr. Vikas Krishnakumar Sharma) we are of the view that benefit of doubt should be accorded to the accused appellant. We order accordingly. The accused appellant is, therefore, acquitted of the offence on the benefit of reasonable doubt in the matter. The accused appellant is stated to be in custody. He shall be released forthwith from such custody unless the same is required in connection with any other case.
7. Consequently and in the light of the above the order of the High Court is set aside and the appeal is allowed.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.