Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
ATUL SREEDHARAN, RAJESH SEKHRI
Sunil Kumar alias Balwant S/o Pikha Ram – Appellant
Versus
State of J&K through In-charge Police Station Reasi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Atul Sreedharan, J.
1. The present appeal has been preferred by the appellants who have been convicted by the impugned order dated 11.11.2017, arising from FIR No. 67/2015, which was registered against the appellants-herein for offences under Sections 363/376/120-B/342/506 of Ranbir Penal Code.
2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:
3. On 12.05.2015, at about 12.20 p.m PW-2, the father of the prosecutrix lodged a written report being EXTP-1 at P.S Reasi, alleging that on 09.05.2015, A-3, in the absence of this witness, took his daughter, aged 15/16 years, for collecting firewood in the jungle. The reputation of A-3 is dubious according to the prosecution, and that the prosecutrix was taken away in absence of her father. Thereafter, it is alleged that A-3, on the pretext of attending the call of nature went away and thereafter A-1 and A-2 reached the scene of occurrence and committed rape upon the prosecutrix one after the another. Thereafter, the accused persons are alleged to have kept the prosecutrix in the jungle for the whole night after which she was released from the custody and disclosed the whole incident to her parents after she reached home. It is also the
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; inconsistencies and lack of corroborative evidence led to the acquittal of the accused.
The prosecution must prove an accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and significant delays or contradictions in testimonies can undermine a conviction.
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 credibility of prosecutrix's testimony is sufficient for conviction without requiring independent corroboration when circumstances support her claims.
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.
The prosecution must prove foundational facts, including the victim's age, to establish guilt under POCSO Act; discrepancies in evidence warrant acquittal.
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.
(1) Rape – If evidence of prosecutrix is found to be reliable, then asking for corroboration, is nothing but adding a pinch of salt to her injuries.(2) There is a difference between “related witness”....
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
