IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA, J.
Satya Narain Yadav, S/o. Sunder Prasad Yadav - Appellant
Versus
The State Of Bihar – Respondent
Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.557 Of 2013
Decided On : 26-11-2024
JUDGMENT :
(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J.)
Heard Ms. Sippy Sinha, Amicus Curiae for the appellant, and Ms. Anita Kumari Singh, learned APP for the State.
2. The present appeal has been filed under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Cr.P.C.’) challenging the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 19.07.2013 in Sessions Trial No. 10 of 2009, arising out of Bakhtiarpur P.S. Case No. 224/06 (G.R. No. 1760/06) passed by learned Sessions Judge, Saharsa (hereinafter referred to as ‘trial court’) by which the appellant/convict has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced rigorous imprisonment for ten years and 25,000/-fine and in default of payment of fine, further rigorous imprisonment for two months.
3. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present appeal are that informant Rekha Devi has given written information to the Superintendent of Police, Saharsa on 19.5.2006 by mentioning therein that on 17.05.2006 in the night at 1’O clock, she was sleeping in her room which was constructed of fush and her mother-in-law was sleeping in the court yard nearby and in the night one of her villager namely Satya Narain Yadav entered into the house then he tried to commit rape forcefully and when she denied and tried to run away out of house, Satya Narain Yadav has over powered her and thrown her on the ground and wrapped ‘Tolia’ on her mouth and tried to outrage her modesty and by force started committing rape on her and continued till half an hour and thereafter, Satya Narain Yadav started to run towards eastern side then the informant’s mother-in-law Bindeshwsari Devi came there and alarm has been made on which neighbour Umesh Yadav and Amar Yadav awoke up and they have seen Satya Narain Yadav going towards eastern side. and victim (PW-1) further stated that she has identified him in the light of lamp (Dibiya) and it is also mentioned in the letter of informant which has been given to Superintendent of Police, Saharsa that Satya Narain Yadav has threatened her that he will kill her if she tell anyone about the occurrence and on that day her husband was not at the house. The letter which has been filed by the informant-Rekha Devi to the Superintendent of Police, Saharsa has been sent to the Officer-in-charge Simri Bakhtiarpur P.S. for institution and investigation, on which Bakhtiarpur P.S. Case 224/06 dated 10.12.2006 has been registered against accused Satya Narain Yadav for the offence u/s 376 of the I.P.C.
4. On the basis of the aforesaid written information of the informant, the Investigating Officer has investigated and submitted charge-sheet no. 151/07 dated 31.07.2007 against accused Satya Narain Yadav for the offence punishable u/s 376 of the I.P.C and cognizance has been taken under Section 376 of the I.P.C vide order dated 13.9.2007 and in the further proceeding of the case, accused Satya Narain Yadav appeared before the trial court and the case has been committed to the court of Sessions by the court of Learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Saharsa vide order dated 16.01.2009.
5. The learned counsel for the appellant has confined her arguments in challenging the sentence imposed by the trial court in its judgment dated 19.07.2013. She submitted that no independent witnesses has supported the occurrence. She further submitted that there was land dispute between the appellant and the informant and for this reason, the informant has falsely implicated the appellant in order to harm his reputation.
6. Before the trial court, prosecution has examined 5 witnesses namely, PW-1 Rekha Devi, PW-2 Umesh Yadav, PW-3 Bindeshwari Devi, PW-4 Shivendra Kumar Verma, and PW-5 Birendra Yadav.
7. PW-1 Rekha Devi is the informant and victim of the case. She has stated in her examination-in-chief on 09.01.2013 that occurrence took place six years ago in the night at about 1'0 clock and at that time she was sleeping at ‘Darwaja’ of her
The prosecution must prove the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and contradictions in the informant's testimony, along with lack of corroborative evidence, necessitate acquittal.
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; any reasonable doubt benefits the accused.
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt in rape cases; contradictions in testimonies and lack of corroborative evidence led to the acquittal of the appellant.
The conviction for rape can be upheld based on the victim's credible testimony, even in the absence of corroborative physical evidence, emphasizing the importance of direct ocular evidence.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of direct evidence to prove the awareness of the victim's caste for conviction under section 3(2) (v) of the Scheduled Caste/Schedu....
The prosecution's reliance on the victim's inconsistent testimony did not meet the evidentiary standard required for conviction, leading to the appellant's acquittal.
The conviction for rape was quashed due to unreliable victim testimony, lack of corroborative evidence, and unexplained delay in FIR lodging.
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.