Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND, J
Madan Son Of Ramnarain Meena – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. conviction for rape (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. defense arguments on identification (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. credibility of prosecutrix (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29) |
| 4. prosecution's burden of proof (Para 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34) |
| 5. judgment quashed (Para 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39) |
Judgment :
1. By way of filing of this appeal, validity of impugned judgment dated 24.06.1991 passed by the Sessions Judge, Jaipur District in Sessions Case No.92/1989 has been questioned.
2. By passing the impugned judgment, the appellants have been convicted for the offence under Section 376 IPC and they have been sentenced to undergo 10 years rigorous imprisonment (for short 'RI') with fine of Rs.500/- each and in default of payment of fine to further undergo one month's additional RI. They have also been convicted for the offence under 447 IPC and sentenced to undergo three months RI.Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
3. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that a written report (Ex.P1) was given by PW-1 "S" with Police Station Chaksu, District Jaipur on 23.05.1989 alleging therein that her husband R
The prosecution must prove each element of a rape charge beyond reasonable doubt, and failure to conduct a Test Identification Parade undermines the reliability of witness identification.
So far as allegations of rape are concerned, the evidence of a prosecutrix must be examined as that of an injured witness whose presence at spot is probable but it can never be presumed that her stat....
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....
Acquittal in rape case upheld where prosecutrix turns hostile, denies force, disputes age records claiming majority, rendering testimony unreliable amid contradictions; prosecution fails beyond reaso....
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.
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.
: Non-examination of Investigating Officer may cause dent in prosecution case.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for credible and unimpeachable testimony, as well as the need for corroboration in cases of sexual assault.
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
