Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Vipul M. Pancholi, Chandra Shekhar Jha, JJ.
Sanjeet Yadav, Son of Sri Arvind Yadav and ors. – Petitioners
Versus
The State of Bihar - Respondent
Criminal Appeal (DB) No.1152 of 2018
Decided On : 12-09-2023
CRIMINAL LAW - RAPE AND CONVICTION - Sections 376-D of IPC, Sections 3(i)(r)(s) w(i)(ii)2(v) of SC/ST Act - The court discussed the provisions of Section 376-D of the IPC, which pertains to gang rape, and the SC/ST Act, which provides for enhanced penalties for crimes against members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The court emphasized the need for the prosecutrix's testimony to be credible and trustworthy, highlighting that the absence of corroborative evidence and inconsistencies in her statements led to doubts about her credibility, ultimately influencing the decision to acquit the accused.
Fact of the Case:
The case arose from an incident on 12.07.2017, where the informant, a member of the SC/ST community, alleged that she was gang-raped by three men while returning to her village. The accused were convicted under Section 376-D of the IPC and sentenced to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment. The informant reported the incident the following day after returning home, where she claimed to have been assaulted and robbed.
Finding of the Court:
The court found significant inconsistencies in the prosecutrix's testimony and noted that her account did not inspire confidence. The absence of physical evidence, such as injuries or signs of recent sexual intercourse, further weakened the prosecution's case. The court concluded that the prosecutrix could not be considered a 'sterling witness' whose testimony alone could sustain a conviction.
Issues: The primary issue was whether the testimony of the prosecutrix was credible enough to support a conviction for gang rape under Section 376-D of the IPC, given the lack of corroborative evidence and the presence of inconsistencies in her statements.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reiterated that while the testimony of a prosecutrix can be sufficient for conviction, it must be credible and free from doubt. The inconsistencies in the prosecutrix's account, coupled with the absence of corroborative evidence, led the court to determine that her testimony did not meet the required standard for conviction.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence of the appellants were set aside, and they were acquitted of all charges. The court directed their immediate release unless detained for other reasons.
JUDGMENT :
Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.
Heard learned counsel Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur appearing on behalf of the appellants, learned counsel Mr. Vishwa Ranjan Choudhary appearing on behalf of the informant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Sujit Kumar Singh appearing on behalf of the State.
2. Present appeal preferred U/s 374(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C. challenging the impugned judgment of conviction dated 23.08.2018 and order of sentence dated 28.08.2018 passed by the learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST, Gaya in S.C./S.T. Trial No. 43/2018 arising out of Neemchak Bathani P.S. Case No. 95/2017, where the appellants/accused have been convicted and sentenced as under:-
| IN CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) NO. 1152 of 2018 | ||||
| Appellant’s Name | Conviction under Sections | Sentence | ||
| Imprisonment | Fine (Rs. | In default of fine | ||
| Sanjeet Yadav | 376-D of the Indian Penal Code | 20 years | 20,000/- | Rigorous Imprisonment of 3 months |
| Hawa@Santosh Yadav@Hawa Yadav | 376-D of the Indian Penal Code | 20 years | 20,000/- Rigorous | Imprisonment of 3 months |
| Vikash Yadav | 376-D of the Indian Penal Code | 20 years | 20,000/- | Rigorous Imprisonment of 3 months |
3. Brief Case of prosecution as springs from written information of informant/victim/PW-1, who is a member of the SC/ST community that on 12.07.2017 while she was returning from her parental house situated at Vill.-Bakthar, P.S.-Khizersarai, Dist.-Gaya, to her matrimonial village Nawdah, having Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand only) and mobile and so about 6:30 P.M., when she was half kilometer away from her village, three persons namely, Sanjeet Yadav (appellant/convict), Hawa Yadav (appellant/convict) and Vikash Yadav (appellant/convict) came there. First of all, Sanjeet Yadav knocked the informant/PW-1 down in the lentil field, snatched Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand only) and mobile and committed rape upon her. After that, Hawa Yadav (appellant/convict) and Vikash Yadav (appellant/convict) also committed rape upon her. When the informant/PW-1 raised alarm, she was assaulted with slaps. After the occurrence, the accused persons fled away towards their village. The informant/PW-1 came to her house and told her family members about the occurrence, but due to heavy rains, she could not go to police station on the night of 12.07.2017.
4. On the basis of above self-statement of informant/victim (PW-1) Neemchak Bathani P.S. Case No. 95 of 2017 dated 13.07.2017 under Sections 376(D), 323, 379, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short ‘I.P.C.’) and under Sections 3(i)(r) w(i)(ii)2(v) of the SC/ST Act was registered, where after investigation the charge-sheet was submitted under Sections 376(D), 323, 379, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code & under Section 3(i)(r)(s) w(i)(ii)2(v) of the SC/ST Act against appellants/convicts. After taking cognizance by learned concerned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST, Gaya and considering the materials available on records, in totality the charges were framed against appellants/convicts on 25.01.2018 under Sections 376(D), 323, 379, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code & under Section 3(i)(r)(s) w(i)(ii)2(v) of the SC/ST Act, which they plead “not guilty” and claimed trial.
5. To substantiate its case prosecution altogether examined six (06) witnesses, namely, PW-1, Soni Devi (informant/victim) D/o of Naresh Choudhary, PW-2, Manju Devi (mother of victim), PW -3, Umesh Choudhary, PW-4, Meera Kumari (first Investigating Officer), PW-5, Dr. Tejaswani Nardima (Doctor) and PW-6, Nirmala Devi, (second
6. Further prosecution relied upon the following exhibits/documents which are as:-
| Ext.- 1 | Formal F.I.R. |
| Ext. -2 | Medical Report |
| Ext.- 3 | Charge-sheet |
(7. Appellants/convicts were examined by learned Trial Court U/s 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr. P.C. , where complete innocence was shown by denying the incriminating circumstances/evidences as appears against appellants/convicts during trial.
8. After conclusion o
The judgment establishes that the sole testimony of a prosecutrix in a rape case must be credible and consistent; otherwise, it cannot be relied upon for conviction, especially in the absence of corr....
The sole testimony of a victim in sexual assault cases can sustain a conviction if credible, without the necessity for corroboration.
The conviction cannot be based solely on the testimony of the prosecutrix if it is full of contradictions and lacks corroborative evidence.
Testimony of the victim in such cases is vital and unless there are compelling reasons which necessitate looking for corroboration of her statement, the courts should find no difficulty to act on the....
The evidence of a prosecutrix in a rape case must be reliable and consistent to meet the standard of a 'sterling witness' for a conviction; otherwise, the prosecution fails to establish guilt beyond ....
The conviction for rape based solely on the prosecutrix's testimony was quashed due to inconsistencies and lack of corroborative evidence, emphasizing the need for reliable and corroborated testimony....
Onus of prosecution cannot be discharged by referring to very strong suspicion and existence of highly suspicious facts to inculpate accused nor falsity of defence could take place of proof which pro....
The conviction for rape was quashed due to unreliable victim testimony, lack of corroborative evidence, and unexplained delay in FIR lodging.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
