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 prosecutrix, coupled with the absence of injuries, may lead to the inability to rely on her testimony.

JUDGMENT :

Mohan Lal, J.

1. Appellant/convict has preferred this criminal conviction appeal under section 410 Cr.P.C. against impugned judgment and order of conviction dated 01.03.2016 rendered by the court of learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu (Fast Track Court) in case titled "State v. Rakesh Kumar" for the commission of offences punishable under section 376 RPC bearing FIR No. 41/2013 of Police Station Bishnah, whereby appellant/convict has been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 12 years and fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-.

2. Feeling aggrieved by the impugned judgment of conviction and order dated 01.03.2016,appellant/convict has questioned its legality, propriety and correctness, and has sought its setting aside/quashment on the following grounds:-

(i) that the trial court has not properly weighed the evidence and has taken adverse view, whereas, the evidence of the prosecutrix is mutually contradictory to the version in FIR and has no ring of truth and suffers from contradictions and discrepancies in its testimony before the trial court, there by, the testimony of the prosecutrix is totally unreliable;

(ii) that the bare perusal of the FIR reveals the fact that the alleged occurrence of rape occurred in open field where other persons/farmers were working closely in the fields, and in the said FIR the prosecutrix states that she felt ashamed of getting raped in presence of other persons/farmers, this version of prosecutrix narrated in the FIR itself is highly improbable as no rape can occur in the presence of other persons;

(iii) that the trial court has not looked into the angle of delay in lodging FIR and the explanation given by the trial court is that the victim is a rustic lady and was supposed to wait for her husband for taking such a decision but nothing prevented her brother-in-law (Jeth) of the victim or other villagers present on spot during the occurrence of rape or even her son to report the matter to the police, and this fact has to be viewed conjointly with the fact that none of the above said persons i.e. her brother-in-law (Jeth) namely Jita Ram and other villagers were present on the spot have deposed in favour of the prosecution;

(iv) that the vaginal smears, the medical reports etc. have not corroborated the version of the prosecutrix, as the medical report is silent regarding the commission of rape, while the trial court has laid emphasis on the fact that the semen stains were found on the salwar of prosecutrix which fact is difficult to infer that she was raped by the appellant;

(v) that no article/seized material was ever produced in the trial court, the testimony of the prosecutrixis not of sterling worth of very high quality and caliber which can be accepted on its face value, the trial court judgment is perverse as the veracity of the testimony of prosecutrix is full of discrepancies and is unbelievable, the trial court has not thoroughly evaluated the testimony and cross-examination of the Investigating Officer of the case, as the Investigating Officer in the cross-examination has exposed the height of unfair and biased investigation.

3. The prosecution is pregnant with a story that Police Station Bishnah swung into action on receipt of a written report filed by the prosecutrix on 05.04.2013 alleging therein that on 01.04.2013 at about 04:00 p.m., she had gone to her fields for bringing cattle fodder (grass) and while she was cutting the grass in her fields, suddenly one person from back side caught hold of her whereby she turned back and saw that one Angrez Singh S/o Baldev Singh R/o Chak Bana Tehsil Bishnah has caught her, though she tried to get herself free from the said person, however the said person pushed her with great force and made her to fall on the ground and with his criminal intention by breaking the string of her salwar, the said person without her will and consent committed rape upon her, she tried to raise hue and cry but the said person snatched drati (sickle) from her and