ALEXANDER THOMAS, C. S. SUDHA
Saji Joseph, C. No. 3670, S/o Joseph – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
C.S.SUDHA, J.
This jail appeal filed under Section 383 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the sole accused in S.C.No.543/2016 on the file of the Court of Session, Thodupuzha, challenging the conviction entered and sentence passed against him for the offences punishable under Sections 450, 341, 323 and 326 IPC.
2. The prosecution case as described in the final report/charge sheet is as follows-The accused with the intention of committing rape, on 29/01/2016 at 11 a.m., trespassed into the house of PW1 bearing No. I/52, Kozhimullur House, Chinnakkal grama panchayat, which house is owned by Aneesh (PW6), wherein PW1was residing along with her family, wrongfully restrained her; voluntarily caused hurt to her by beating, kicking her and thereafter ravished her. The rape was committed in the hall of the aforesaid residential building. Hence the accused is alleged to have committed the offences punishable under the above-mentioned Sections.
3. On the basis of Ext.P1 FIS of PW1, the victim, given on 30/01/2016 at 10 a.m. and recorded by PW11, WCPO Santhanpara Police Station, Ext.P9 FIR, i.e., Crime No.50/2016, Santhanpara Police Station was registered by PW13, the Additional Sub Inspector of
Acharuparambath Pradeepan v. State
Asan Tharayil Baby alias Varghese v. State of Kerala
Chunthuram v. State of Chhattisgarh
Kunjumon v. State of Kerala: 2011 (4) KHC 72
Pattipati Venkaiah v. State of A.P.
Raveendran C.T. v. State of Kerala
Ram Singh @ Chhaju v. State of Himachal Pradesh: (2010) 2 SCC 445
Krishan v. State of Haryana: (2014) 13 SCC 574
State of Himachal Pradesh v. Manga Singh: (2019) 16 SCC 759
Indra Kumar Patodia v. Reliance Industries Ltd.
Raju alias Rajendra v. State of Maharashtra
Ronny alias Ronald James Alwaris v. State of Maharashtra
State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh
State of Maharashtra v. Chandraprakash Kewalchand Jain
Ramkishan Mithanlal Sharma v. State of Bombay: AIR 1955 SC 104
Meesala Ramakrishan v. State of A.P.
In cases of rape, inconsistencies and lack of corroborative evidence, particularly regarding victim identification and age, undermine prosecution's case, necessitating acquittal.
Sentence - Kidnapping and abduction - Sentence cannot be reduced as Manner of commission of offence was cruel.
The prosecution's case can be established through circumstantial evidence and witness demeanor despite inconsistencies in testimonies regarding identification, affirming the conviction under relevant....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the significance of the victim's testimony, the lack of necessity for corroboration in rape cases, and the importance of identifying the accused in....
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.