Mahiboob Pasha vs State - 2020 Supreme(Kar) 950

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2020 Supreme(Kar) 950

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU (KALABURAGI BENCH)
P.N. Desai, J.
Mahiboob Pasha - Appellant
Versus
State - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 3632 of 2012
Decided On : 25-06-2020

Advocates Appeared:
Liyaqat Fareed Ustad, Advocate, Sharanabasappa M Patil, Advocate

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 366, 376, 504, and 506 - Conviction of appellant for offences including kidnapping and rape - Trial Court imposed rigorous imprisonment and fines, but court found insufficient evidence and inconsistencies in witness testimonies. (Paras 1 to 44)

(B) Evidence - Prosecution's burden of proof - The prosecution failed to substantiate its claims beyond reasonable doubt, with contradictions and lack of corroborative evidence in testimonies. (Paras 11, 42)

Facts of the case:
The appellant allegedly induced the victim to leave her home, claiming he married her, and subsequently allegedly raped her. The victim's age was disputed, and her conduct following the incident raised doubts about the prosecution's narrative. (Paras 2, 8, 24, 29)

Findings of Court:
The High Court observed significant inconsistencies in the evidence presented, particularly regarding the victim's lack of resistance and opportunity to escape. The absence of medical evidence also weakened the prosecution's case. (Paras 1, 12, 42)

Issues: Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt the charges of kidnapping and rape, considering the inconsistencies in the victim's and witnesses' testimonies. (Paras 1, 2)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the evidence from the victim did not sufficiently inspire confidence, citing contradictions and the lack of supporting evidence. The failure to provide medical reports was particularly detrimental to the prosecution's case. (Paras 35, 42)

Result: Appeal allowed; the accused was acquitted of all charges. (Paras 42, 44)

Table of Content
1. conviction details and sentencing of the accused. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. prosecution's outline of the victim's abduction and sexual assault. (Para 4 , 5)
3. procedural history prior to the session court proceedings. (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
4. post-conviction appeal raised by the accused. (Para 9)
5. arguments for acquittal based on inconsistencies in evidence. (Para 10 , 12)
6. court's considerations on established principles of evidence. (Para 13 , 14)
7. evaluation of witnesses' credibility and evidentiary support. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21)
8. analysis of victim's testimony and its reliability. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28)
9. flaws in investigative procedure and evidence collection. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34)
10. judicial perspective on the evaluation of prosecutrix's testimony. (Para 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42)
11. conclusion on the judgment and acquittal of the accused. (Para 43 , 44)

JUDGMENT

P.N.Desai, J. - This appeal arises out of judgment passed by the IV Additional Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi dated 18.07.2012 convicting the accused appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 366 , 376, 504 and 506 of IPC.

2. The learned Sessions Judge sentenced the accused to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 05 years and to pay fine of Rs.3,000/- to the offence punishable under Section 366 of IPC, in default of payment of fine the accused shall further undergo simple imprisonment period for 06 months. Accused to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 07 years and to pay fine of Rs.3,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 376 of INDIAN PENAL CODE , in default of payment of fine he shall undergo simple imprisonment for 6 months. Accused to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 03 months for the offence punishable under Section 504 of IPC. Accused to undergo S.I. for a period of 06 months for the offence punishable under Section 506 of IPC. It is further ordered that all the substantive sentences shall run concurrently. If fine amount is recovered, out of fine amount an amount of Rs.5,000/- shall be paid to victim-girl as compensation. Accused is in judicial custody from 24.08.2010 and it is ordered that the period which accused has spent in judicial custody shall be set off against the sentence imposed against him.

3. The brief case of the prosecution is that the accused and victim-girl were residents of Kalaburagi City. The victim-girl is daughter of one Smt. Rubeena w/o Mohammed Khaleel-PW.1. The victim-girl has studied up to 10th standard. It is case of the prosecution that at about 10 to 15 days prior to lodging of the complaint by the complainant-PW.1, this accused came to Humnabad to attend the marriage of relatives of the complainant. At that time, the accused also came there and started to talk with the victim-girl. It is further case of the prosecution that on 28.07.2010 in evening the complainant's daughter-victim-girl went out of her house. But she did not return to the house. Thereafter accused informed over phone to the complainantvictim's mother that he had married to her daughtervictim- girl. So, complainant-PW.1 has lodged the complaint stating that her daughter is minor and accused induced her and kidnapped her. The complaint is lodged before M. B. Nagar Police Station as per Ex.P.1 on 10.08.2010. The Police Sub Inspector - PW.9- Krishnappa s/o Shankreppa Kaldevaru who is the Station House Officer received the complaint at 01.00 p.m. and registered the case in Crime No.95/2010 for the offence punishable under Section 366A of IPC and sent the FIR to the Court as per Ex.P.9. He conducted spot panchanama as per Ex.P.2 which is shown by the complainant-PW.1 and recorded the statements of panchas by name Pandu-PW.4 and Apparay-PW.3. Then he recorded the statements of Jaibunissa-PW.7 and Wassim Khan-PW.2.

4. On 18.08.2010 morning at 11.00 a.m. the victim-girl appeared before the Police Station and police have recorded her statement. At the t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2020 Supreme(Kar) 950

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU (KALABURAGI BENCH)P.N. Desai, J.Mahiboob Pasha - AppellantVersusState - RespondentCriminal Appeal No. 3632 of 2012Decided On : 25-06-2020

Cases Referred (9)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU (KALABURAGI BENCH)
P.N. Desai, J.
Mahiboob Pasha - Appellant
Versus
State - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 3632 of 2012
Decided On : 25-06-2020