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

2023 Supreme(Del) 4046

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Neena Bansal Krishna, JJ.
State of NCT of Delhi – Appellant
Versus
Amarpal – Respondent
Cr.L.P. 147 of 2022
Decided On : 18-08-2023

Advocates appeared:
Ms. Manjeet Arya, APP for the State with SI Arti, and Insp. Manjusha.
Mr. Asim Ali, Advocate, for the Respondent.

Inconsistencies in the victim's statements and lack of corroborative evidence can lead to the acquittal of the accused in sexual assault cases.

Headnote:

Section 376 IPC - POCSO Act - 6 - The court discussed the inconsistencies and contradictions in the testimony of the victim and the lack of corroborative evidence, leading to the acquittal of the accused.

Fact of the Case:

The victim alleged sexual abuse and rape by the accused. The prosecution presented witness testimonies and medical examination reports. The accused was acquitted due to inconsistencies in the victim's statements and lack of corroborative evidence.

Finding of the Court:

The court found inconsistencies in the victim's statements and lack of corroborative evidence, leading to the acquittal of the accused.

Issues: Inconsistencies in victim's statements, reliability of witness testimonies, and lack of corroborative evidence.

Ratio Decidendi: Inconsistencies in the victim's statements and lack of corroborative evidence led to the acquittal of the accused.

Final Decision: The application for Leave to Appeal against the acquittal was dismissed.

JUDGMENT (Oral)

1. An application under Section 378 (III) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of Leave to Appeal against the Order dated 21.12.2019 vide which the respondent/accused has been acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 376 IPC read with Section 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 in FIR No.484/2013, Police Station R.K. Puram, Delhi.

2. The case of the prosecution was that on 12.12.2013 on the complaint of the victim that she had been sexually abused, FIR was recorded and investigations were conducted. During the course of the investigations statements of the witnesses were recorded and the medical examination of the prosecutrix was got done.

3. On completion of investigation, charge sheet under Section 376 IPC and Section 6 POCSO Act was filed.

4. Charges under Section 376 and Section 6 POCSO Act were framed against the respondent/accused, to which he pleaded not guilty.

5. The prosecution in support of its case examined 21 witnesses. The most material of which is statement of PW2 father of the victim, PW3 victim and PW5 friend of the victim. Considering the inconsistencies and the contradictions in the testimony of the three material witnesses, the respondent was acquitted vide judgment dated 21.12.2019.

6. Aggrieved, the present application for grant of Leave to Appeal against the acquittal has been filed.

7. The main grounds agitated are that undue weightage has been given to the minor contradictions and variations in the statement of the victim. It is not necessary in a case of sexual assault to seek corroboration of the evidence of the victim from other evidences and her testimony can be the sole basis of conviction. The MLC also noted a small pressure lesion on left outer quadrant of breast. The fact that prosecutrix was only 17 years and 11 months old has also been over looked. The corroborative evidence by way of the FSL Report which found that the blood found on the carpet matched the DNA of the victim has been ignored. The testimony of the witnesses and the documentary evidence clearly nailed the accused who ought to have been convicted. Learned ASJ has failed to appreciate the testimony of the victim and the documentary evidence in the right perspective. Hence, Leave is sought to appeal against the judgement of acquittal.

8. Submissions heard.

9. To appreciate the contentions made on behalf of the prosecution it would be pertinent to consider the testimony of the victim which was held to be full of contradictions and not reliable.

10. The first narration of the incident was made by the victim/ prosecutrix on 12.12.2013 while she was admitted in the hospital for her treatment. She stated that she was pursuing English Speaking Course and had applied for admission in a Computer Course. On that day her school friend Kajal, her erstwhile school friend from Sarvodaya Co-Ed School, Vasant Vihar, gave her a call from her mobile phone No.9812346559 at about 12 noon and told her that she was inclined to pursue the Computer Course and she wanted to get information about it from the prosecutrix. She called the prosecutrix to Sector-1, R.K. Puram where she met her at the Bus Stand, Sector-1, R.K. Puram, from where they took a bus and came to the First Floor of a house in South Extension where Kajal had told that her parents are residing. However, when they reached the house, none was present in the house but Kajal assured her that her parents would come back in some time. They started talking but in the mean while one boy aged about 25-26 years having a height of 5'6" came and started talking. After some time, Kajal left the room on the pretext of getting something to eat and locked the door from outside. The prosecutrix kept on telling her to open the door, but it was not opened. Thereafter, that boy held her hair and raped her twice. She quickly dressed up. In a hurry, she was unable to trace her phone but picked up the mobile phone of the accused which was lying on the bed and called her friend

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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