Acquittal upheld in rape appeal as prosecutrix testimony unreliable due to contradictions, improvements, unnatural non-resistance, absence of injuries, delayed disclosure, and enmity motive, despite principle allowing conviction on sole reliable victim testimony.

JUDGMENT :
Sushil Kukreja, Judge

The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant/victim/prosecutrix under Section 372 Cr.P.C. against judgment, dated 25.04.2014, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (1), Una, H.P., in Sessions Case No. 10 of 2013, dated 25.04.2014, whereby the accused persons (respondents No. 2 and 3 herein) were acquitted from the charges under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’).

2. The facts giving rise to the present appeal, as per the prosecution story, can be summarized as under:

2(a). On 24.04.2013, the police of Police Station Bangana, through the office of Superintendent of Police, Una, received a complaint qua the rape of a women. The prosecutrix (appellant herein) stated in her complaint that during the month of November, 2012, on the eve of Karwa Chauth, accused Seema Devi called her to her house. The prosecutrix, alongwith her children went to the house of Seema Devi at village Chakdova and in the evening, on being insisted by her, the prosecutrix stayed there and slept in the kitchen alongwith accused Seema Devi and her two children. The prosecutrix further stated that around 10:00 p.m. accused Gian Chand entered in the kitchen and accused Seema Devi went out and she also bolted the door from outside. As per the prosecutrix, accused Gian Chand raped her and also threatened her with dire consequences, in case she divulged the incident to anyone. He also threatened that he knows witch-craft and threatened her with knife that he will kill her husband and also do away with her life. The prosecutrix, in her complaint, stated that Seema Devi and gian Chand conspired together to exploit her sexually. The prosecutrix returned to her home at 08:00 a.m. in the morning of the subsequent day, but she did not disclose the incident to anyone. After the incident, accused Gian Chand visited her house 4-5 times during the night and every time he raped her. As per the prosecutrix, she could not disclose about the acts of Gian Chand to anyone due to fear and also due to her mental stage, but due to great constraint, ultimately on 18.04.2013, she narrated the whole story to her husband and sister. On 19.04.2013, the prosecutrix alongwith her husband went to police station and moved application to SHO, Bangana. On 21.04.2013 due to intervention of respectable persons and Up-Pradhan of Gram Panchayat, Chakdova, she entered into a compromise. On 24.04.2013 she alongwith her husband came to Una and moved a complaint to Superintendent of Police, Una, and on the same day she was medically examined at R.H. Una. Police effected relevant recoveries, spot map was prepared and the statements of the witnesses were recorded. Statement of the prosecutrix was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and the police procured the relevant records. On 24.04.2013 accused Gian Chand and on 23.06.2023 accused Seema Devi were arrested. After completion of the investigation, police presented the charge-sheet before the Trial Court.

3. The learned Trial Court took cognizance against the accused persons and charges under Section 376 and 506 IPC were framed against them. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, examined fifteen witnesses. Statements of the accused persons under Section 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded, wherein they stated that they were falsely implicated in the instant case. Ho