Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
RAJANI DUBEY, AMITENDRA KISHORE PRASAD
Sharad Kumar Chaube S/o Sanat Chaube – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RAJANI DUBEY, J.
1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20.05.2019 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Bemetara, District Bemetara (C.G.) in Special Case (Atrocities) No.03/2018, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Sections 366 and 376 of IPC read with Section 3 (2) (v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and Section 5 (Tha) read with Section 6 of POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo RI for 10 years with fine of Rs.100/- and life imprisonment with fine of Rs.100/- respectively, with default stipulations.
2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 03.12.2017 mother of the prosecutrix lodged a missing report, stating that the prosecutrix was not found in the house thereafter she searched her in the village, she enquired about the prosecutrix with the brother of accused and she came to know that the accused was also not found in the house. On the basis of report lodged by the mother of prosecutrix, the police registered and thereafter searched the appellant and prosecutrix and the prosecutrix was found in possession of appellant. After investigation, charg
The prosecution failed to prove the prosecutrix's age under 18 years and her consent negated the charges of abduction and sexual assault.
The prosecution must prove the age of the victim and the absence of consent beyond reasonable doubt; insufficient evidence leads to acquittal.
The prosecution must provide conclusive evidence of a victim's age and lack of consent in sexual assault cases; insufficient evidence leads to acquittal.
Burden of proof lies with prosecution to establish all aspects of an offense, particularly the minor status of the victim, which affects the conviction under sexual assault laws.
The prosecution failed to prove the age of the prosecutrix was below 18 years and that the appellant committed forcible sexual intercourse, leading to the acquittal of the appellant.
The prosecution must prove the victim's age beyond reasonable doubt for a conviction under the POCSO Act, and inconsistencies in evidence can lead to acquittal.
The court acquitted the accused due to reasonable doubt about the prosecutrix's age and consent, emphasizing that without credible evidence or corroboration, a conviction cannot be sustained.
The appeal was allowed as the prosecution failed to prove the prosecutrix's age and voluntary relationship negated the charges of abduction and rape.
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
