Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
Najrul Ansari @ Gulshan Biswas S/o Shri Nasiuddin Ansari – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.
1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction dated 15.05.2006 and sentence dated 17.05.2006 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Jamtara in Sessions Case No.101 of 2004 whereby and whereunder, the sole appellant has been held guilty for the offence under sections 347/376 of INDIAN PENAL CODE and sentenced to undergo R.I. of 1 year for the offence under section 347 of I.P.C. and R.I. of 7 years for the offence under section 376 of IPC. Both sentences are directed to run concurrently.
FACTUAL MATRIX
2. Factual matrix giving rise to this appeal in a narrow campus as per written report of prosecutrix-cum-victim is that on 30th June, 2003, the present appellant met the prosecutrix in her village and ensured her to procure matriculation certificate and asked to come on 02.07.2003 at Fatehpur, T.K. Gram, thereafter, they will go to Jamtara. Relying upon his assurance, the prosecutrix went to T.K. Gram, Fatehpur after disclosing the above fact to her sister-in-law Phool Kumari (PW-5) and reached there about 2:00 PM, where Nazrul Ansari was waiting her. After some conversation with the prosecutrix, the appellant left the p
The prosecution failed to establish credible evidence for the conviction of rape and wrongful confinement, leading to the appeal's success and the quashing of the trial court's judgment.
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 victim's credible testimony is sufficient for conviction under rape despite lack of medical evidence or hostile witnesses' corroboration.
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.
Testimony of minor victim can be the basis for conviction despite medical evidence not supporting the claim.
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 and trespass was upheld based on credible witness testimony, and the sentence was reduced considering the time elapsed since the crime.
Solitary evidence of the prosecutrix is enough to sustain a conviction if it transpires confidence, and corroboration by an eyewitness and medical evidence can support the prosecution's case.
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 ....
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
