SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2014 Supreme(Del) 463

High Court of Delhi
THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR
Krishan & Another
Versus
State
CRL.A. Nos. 967, 986 of 2001
Decided On : 12-02-2014

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants:Siddhartha Aggarwal, Adit S. Pujari, Advocates.
For the Respondent: Fizani Hussain, APP.

The importance of the prosecutrix's testimony being cogent and coherent, the need to ignore minor contradictions, and the accused's entitlement to challenge reports under Section 293 of the Cr.P.C.

Headnote:

Section 376(2) - Gang Rape - IPC - [Section 376(2), Section 506 Part-I, Section 34 IPC] - The court discussed the contradictory versions of the prosecutrix, the material discrepancies in her testimony, and the illegality of admitting the CFSL report without allowing the defense to cross-examine the expert. The court emphasized the importance of the prosecutrix's testimony being cogent and coherent, and highlighted the need to ignore minor contradictions. The court also cited legal precedents regarding the admissibility of reports under Section 293 of the Cr.P.C. and the accused's right to challenge such reports.

Fact of the Case:

The appellants were convicted for gang rape under Section 376(2) and sentenced to imprisonment. The prosecution's version of the incident involved contradictory statements from the prosecutrix, material discrepancies in her testimony, and the illegality of admitting the CFSL report without allowing the defense to cross-examine the expert.

Finding of the Court:

The court found material contradictions in the prosecutrix's testimony, emphasized the importance of her testimony being cogent and coherent, and highlighted the illegality of admitting the CFSL report without allowing the defense to cross-examine the expert. The court also noted the accused's entitlement to a benefit of doubt and acquitted them.

Issues: The issues revolved around the contradictory versions of the prosecutrix, the material discrepancies in her testimony, and the admissibility of the CFSL report without allowing the defense to cross-examine the expert.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of the prosecutrix's testimony being cogent and coherent, highlighted the need to ignore minor contradictions, and cited legal precedents regarding the admissibility of reports under Section 293 of the Cr.P.C. and the accused's right to challenge such reports.

Final Decision: The accused persons were acquitted based on the material discrepancies in the prosecutrix's testimony, the illegality of admitting the CFSL report without allowing the defense to cross-examine the expert, and the entitlement to a benefit of doubt.

Judgment :

Indermeet Kaur, J.

1. The appellants before this Court are Gopi and Krishan. They had been convicted under Section 376(2) for the offence of gang rape and Section 506 Part-I read with Section 34 IPC vide judgment dated 01.5.2001. Vide order of sentence dated 04.5.2001 Gopi had been sentenced RI for 11 years for the offence under Section 376(2)(g) IPC and a fine of Rs.2000/- in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for six months; for the offence under section 506 Part-I he had been sentenced to undergo RI for two years. Accused Krishan had been sentenced to undergo RI for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs.2000/- in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for six months for the offence under Section 376 (2)(g) IPC and for the offence under Section 506 Part-I he had been sentenced to undergo RI for two years. Benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C. had been granted to them.

2. Version of the prosecution unfolded in the version of Smt. “D” examined as PW-3. Incident is dated 02.9.1993; time of incident was about 10:00 – 10:30 p.m. The first information about this incident was received by SI Hari Chand (PW-10) posted at the police control room on 03.9.1993 at 100 number. This information was conveyed in the local police station to H.C. Rattan Lal (PW-4), the then duty officer, at the police station who had recorded this information at 7:10 a.m. which was recorded in DD No.26-A (Ex.PW-4/A). Investigation was marked to SI Hari Singh (PW-13) who along with constable Krishan Kumar (PW-6) reached the spot i.e. the jhuggi behind the Saint Mark School, GH- 5 & 7 Block, Paschim Vihar. PW-3 met them there. Her statement Ex. PW-3/A was recorded. In this version, she had disclosed that on the previous night at about 10:00 p.m. while she was sleeping in her own jhuggi along with her children accused Gopi at the point of a knife threatened her that he would kill her child unless she accompany him to his jhuggi; she was forced to accompany him to the nearby jhuggi of Krishan where Krishan and Ram Niwas were present. All the aforenoted three persons committed rape upon her. She was asked to make tea in the morning; since she got a chance she slip out the jhuggi and reported the matter. It was in this statement that the endorsement Ex PW-13/A was made by the investigating officer and the rukka was dispatched through PW-6 pursuant to which at 8.30 a.m. the present FIR No. 493/1993 under Section 376,506,323 read with Section 34 IPC was registered by SI Amar Singh (PW-2) and proved as Ex. PW-2/A.

3. At the scene of crime, the investigating officer seized a vegetable cutting knife which was lying at the spot and which PW-3 had stated that was used by Gopi to threaten her. Its sketch Ex.PW-3/C was prepared which was taken into possession vide memo Ex. PW-3/B. Site plan Ex.PW-13/B was prepared. The torn clothes of the prosecutrix which included her jampher, her maxi and a salwar were taken into possession vide memo Ex. PW-1/A in the presence of a neighbor Smt. Savitri Devi (PW-1). The prosecutrix was medically examined at the DDU hospital by Dr. Jitender Singh vide MLC Ex. PW-9/A on 03.9.1993. No external injury was noted. There was swelling on the right chick and abrasions on both the breasts; her other parameters were found normal.

4. The accused Gopi and Krishan who had been arrested from the spot i.e. from the jhuggi of Krishan; they were medically examined on 03.9.1993 vide their MLCs proved as Ex. PW-9/B and Ex.PW-9/C. The under garments of both the accused were also seized vide memo Ex. PW-6/B.

5. On 06.9.1993 the statement of the prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded by Ms.Raj Rani Mitra learned M.M. (PW-14) proved as Ex.PW-14/A. The third accused Ram Niwas surrendered in the court on 13.9.1993 and he was medically examined on 14.9.1993 by Dr.Suresh Khurana (PW-7); he was also arrested.

6. On 08.10.1993 the seized articles which included the clothes of the prosecutrix, under garments of the accused Gopi and Krishan as also the vaginal



















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top