Back
MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Bhanwar Singh S/o Jagmal Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Manoj Kumar Garg, J.
1. Instant criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. against the judgment dated 27.02.1993 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ratangarh, District Churu in Sessions Case No.53/1992 (20/90) by which the learned Judge convicted the appellant for offence under Section 376 of IPC and sentenced him to undergo five yeas’ R.I. alongwith a fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo two months’ R.I.
2. Brief facts of the case are that on 26.11.1989, Mst. ‘P’ submitted a report at Police Station Ratangarh, District Churu, inter-alia alleging therein that her family members are traditional story-tellers. On 25.11.1989, she along with family members went to Khudera Chota for story-telling. Late at night, at about 3 AM, when she woke up for answering the call of nature, the accused-appellant Bhanwar Singh caught hold of her and committed rape upon her. On raising hue and cry, some people came to her rescue, upon which, the accused-appellant fled away. Counsel further argued that the medical evidence also contradicts the prosecutrix’s account, which claims that a rape was committed for two-three hours.
Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that in the cases where there are serious doubts regarding the sexual intercourse, the benefit of doubt has been provided upon the accused.
The conviction for rape based solely on the prosecutrix's testimony was quashed due to inconsistencies and lack of corroborative evidence, emphasizing the need for reliable and corroborated testimony....
For a conviction in a rape case based solely on the testimony of the prosecutrix, such evidence must be corroborated, consistent, and of 'sterling quality'; absence of medical evidence and inconsiste....
Point of Law : Prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt - Testimony of prosecutrix is infirm, contradictory and doubtful, which does not inspire confidence....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of corroborative evidence in rape cases and the principle that serious infirmities and inconsistencies in the evidence of the prosec....
The evidence of a prosecutrix must be credible and consistent for a conviction in rape cases; contradictions and lack of supporting evidence can lead to acquittal.
The conviction for rape can be upheld based on the victim's credible testimony, even in the absence of corroborative physical evidence, emphasizing the importance of direct ocular evidence.
The prosecution must prove an accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and significant delays or contradictions in testimonies can undermine a conviction.
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
