Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA, J.
Jhandu @ Sundar Paswan S/o Late Ramashish Paswan – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 2319 of 2017
Decided On : 10-01-2024
CRIMINAL LAW - RAPE AND HOUSE TRESPASS - IPC SECTIONS 376, 452; Cr.P.C. SECTIONS 374(2), 156(3), 207, 209 - The court discussed the provisions of IPC Sections 376 (punishment for rape) and 452 (house-trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint), emphasizing the need for reliable evidence, particularly in rape cases. The court highlighted the importance of the victim's testimony being credible and consistent, referencing the 'sterling witness' standard. The lack of corroborative evidence and the presence of contradictions in the victim's statements led to the conclusion that the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for the gang rape of the victim by three accused persons who entered her house at night. The victim reported the incident after a delay, claiming that the police did not initially register her complaint. The trial court convicted the appellant based on the victim's testimony and sentenced him to ten years for rape and five years for house trespass.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the trial court erred in convicting the appellant as the evidence presented was insufficient to support the conviction. The victim's testimony was inconsistent, and there was a lack of corroborative evidence, including medical reports that did not substantiate the claims of rape.
Issues: Whether the conviction was justified based solely on the victim's testimony, and whether the evidence presented met the legal standards required for a conviction in a rape case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reiterated that while a conviction can be based on the sole testimony of a victim, such testimony must be credible and consistent. The absence of corroborative evidence and the contradictions in the victim's statements led to the conclusion that the prosecution did not meet the burden of proof required for a conviction.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the appellant was acquitted of all charges.
JUDGMENT :
CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel Ms. Kumari Anupam appearing on behalf of the appellant and learned APP Mr. A.M.P. Mehta appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The present appeal has been preferred under Section 374(2) of Criminal Procedure Code (in short “Cr.P.C.”) by above named accused/appellant, challenging the judgment of conviction dated 12.06.2017 and order for sentence dated 17.06.2017 passed in connection with S. Tr. No. 1370 of 2011(arising out of Daniawan P.S. Case No. 10 of 2001), whereby and whereunder learned Additional District & Sessions Judge-IV, Patna City convicted under Section 376/34 and under Section 452/34 of I.P.C. and ordered to be sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of Ten years for the offence under Section 376/34 of I.P.C. each and a fine of Rs.15,000/-each and in default of payment of fine, he shall further be served one year imprisonment. Further, the appellant has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of 5 (five) years each for the offence under Section 452/34 I.P.C. and a fine of Rs. 5000/-each and in default of payment thereof, he has to serve sentence of three months. Both sentences shall run concurrently.
3. The crux of prosecution case as it springs from the fard-e-beyan of informant that on 3/4.5.2001 at about 12 A.M., while the informant was sleeping in her house alongwith her two children, three accused persons entered into her house, to whom she recognized as Jagdip Beldar, Moti Paswan, Jhandu Dusadh. She has further stated that all three persons entered in her room and raped her one after another, where 4-5 unknown persons were standing in “Angan” (court-yard) armed with “Lathi” & “Danda”. She has further stated that her husband had gone to other village for installing pump and her mother-in-law was sleeping in another room in the same house. It had been further stated that Jagdip Beldar tied her mouth with a “Gamcha”, Moti Dusadh caught hold her hands and Jhandu Dusadh caught hold of her legs and they have committed rape upon her one after another. It had been further stated that after committing rape all the accused persons fled away alongwith the 'Gamcha'. It has been further stated that upon raising alarm Lal Bahadur Das (Bhaisur/Brother-in-law), Smt. Gunja Devi and Mithlesh Das reached there to whom the complainant/ victim narrated the incident. The complainant/victim had further stated that on the following day i.e. on 3.5.2001 Lal Bahadur Das (Bhaisur/Brother-in-law) went to bring Lal Bihari Das, the husband of the complainant and they come back to the house at 6 P.M. on 3.5.2001 and the complainant's Bhaisur informed about the occurrence to his brother Lal Bihari Das. It is further stated in the complaint petition that both the brothers alongwith complainant went to the house of accused and asked them why they had committed the crime, upon which the accused threatened them to face consequences if they would report the matter to the Police, upon which they returned to their houses. It is further stated that on the following day i.e. on 4.5.2001 at 9 A.M. the complainant alongwith her husband went to Police Station Daniawan and matter was reported to the Police, upon which the Police said that it would come to the place of occurrence at the evening but the Police did not come. It had also been stated that the complainant's husband again visited to the Police Station on 19.5.2001 and learnt that the Police has not registered the case in collusion with the accused.
4. Due to aforesaid non co-operation of police, having no option left a complaint Case No. 354(c)/2001 was lodged before CJM Patna, which was transferred to concerned police station to investigate after lodging FIR under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C., where police registered a case being Daniwana P.S. Case No. 10 of 2001 for the offence under Sections 376/448/504/345 of the I.P.C. After completion of investigation, the police submitted charge-sheet against all accused persons including appellants
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 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....
For a conviction in a rape case based solely on the testimony of the prosecutrix, such evidence must be corroborated, consistent, and of 'sterling quality'; absence of medical evidence and inconsiste....
The conviction cannot be based solely on the testimony of the prosecutrix if it is full of contradictions and lacks corroborative evidence.
The conviction for rape was quashed due to unreliable victim testimony, lack of corroborative evidence, and unexplained delay in FIR lodging.
Point of Law : The chastity of a woman ruined as soon as such offence is committed, while in a civilized society, respect or reputation is a basic right. No member of society can afford to conceive t....
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
