Back
SUDESH BANSAL
Hafiz Khan – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Mr. Sudesh Bansal, J. - This appeal under Section 374 CrPC has been filed challenging the order dated 25-4-1990 in Sessions Case No.53/1988 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Gangapur City, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 376 IPC and sentenced to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment, with fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further undergo six month rigorous imprisonment.
2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that on 7-5-1988 FIR was lodged at PS Gangapur City by prosecutrix alleging therein that on 6-5-1988 about 2.00 PM when she went to take water from the well of Bashir, the accused was taking bath, as soon as the prosecutrix took rope and balti for fetching water, the accused caught her hold from back and pushed her in the Guni of the well and started committing offence. When the prosecutrix tried to raise hue and cry the accused put lugri in her mouth and committed offence. After taking water from the well, the prosecutrix went to her house and then went to mother of accused and narrated the incident, thereupon mother of accused asked to take action against the accused. In the night the prosecutrix narrated the incident to her husband
The conviction for rape based solely on the prosecutrix's testimony is unsustainable without corroborative evidence, especially when inconsistencies and delays in reporting raise doubts.
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....
Conviction for rape can rely solely on the prosecutrix's credible testimony, with proper explanation of FIR delay not undermining the prosecution’s case.
The prosecution's case can stand on the testimony of the victim alone, supported by corroboration, despite minor contradictions. Delays in reporting aren't fatal if reasonably explained.
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....
Offence of Rape - Conviction Upheld - Reliability of statement of prosecutrix/victim - Statement of prosecutrix, if found to be worthy of credence and reliable, requires no corroboration - Court may ....
Conviction for rape requires corroboration of the victim's testimony, especially when medical evidence contradicts the claims, highlighting the need for strict proof in serious charges.
The conviction for rape and trespass was upheld based on credible witness testimony, and the sentence was reduced considering the time elapsed since the crime.
In cases of sexual assault, delay in lodging FIR is not fatal if explained, especially when considering societal attitudes toward victims.
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
