Back
MITALI THAKURIA
MD. RUSTAM ALI S/O LATE MUNIRUDDIN ALI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF ASSAM – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
MITALI THAKURIA, J.
1. Heard Mr. B. C. Das, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent.
2. This appeal is filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the Judgment and Order dated 11.02.2013, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Darrang, in Sessions Case No. 200(DM)/09, convicting the accused/appellant to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-(Rupees one thousand) only, in default of which to undergo simple imprisonment for one month under Section 366 of the IPC, and rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-(Rupees one thousand) only, in default of which to undergo simple imprisonment for another month under Section 376 of the IPC.
3. The prosecution story in brief is as follows:
The prosecution must establish its case beyond a reasonable doubt; inconsistencies in witness testimonies and lack of medical evidence can lead to acquittal.
The absence of medical evidence does not preclude conviction for rape if the victim's testimony is credible and consistent.
The court established that a victim's testimony, while crucial, must be corroborated; contradictions in the prosecutrix's statements rendered the conviction unsafe.
The testimony of a victim, particularly a minor or disabled, can substantiate a conviction in sexual assault cases without needing corroboration, provided it is credible and consistent.
The court affirmed that a victim's testimony, especially from a minor, can suffice for conviction in sexual assault cases, even without medical corroboration.
The court affirmed that the sole testimony of a child victim can suffice for conviction in sexual assault cases if found credible, despite minor inconsistencies in other testimonies.
The conviction cannot be based solely on the testimony of the prosecutrix if it is full of contradictions and lacks corroborative evidence.
The court can base conviction on the sole testimony of the prosecutrix if it inspires confidence, but her testimony must be of sterling quality and free from contradictions and inconsistencies.
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
