.... vs State of Haryana - 2023 Supreme(P&H) 1396

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(P&H) 1396

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Sureshwar Thakur, Kuldeep Tiwari, JJ.
XXXX – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana & Anr. – Respondents
CRA-AD 140 of 2022
Decided On : 25-01-2023

Advocates appeared:
For the Parties : Mr. A.K. Sharma, Mr. Anmol Malik DAG, Haryana

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 354

(D), 376(2)(N), and 506 - Appeals against acquittal - The learned trial court acquitted the accused due to lack of credible evidence, concluding that the sexual relationship was consensual despite promises of marriage. The prosecutrix's statement was found to lack reliability due to contradictions and lack of medical evidence. The High Court reaffirmed its power to review evidence but found no grounds to overturn the acquittal. (Paras 8, 9, 20)

(B) Standard of proof in sexual offences - The court emphasized that in sexual offences, the statement of the prosecutrix carries substantial weight but must be credible and consistent with corroborative evidence. (Paras 11, 12)

Facts of the case:
The prosecutrix alleged sexual abuse over several years by the respondent, claiming he misled her with promises of marriage. She alleged rape and coercion leading to a suicide attempt but failed to provide credible evidence supporting her claims.

Findings of Court:
The trial court found the prosecutrix's claims unreliable due to contradictions and a lack of corroborative evidence and deemed her sexual relationship with the accused consensual.

Issues: The main issues examined were the credibility of the prosecutrix’s statement and the trial court's handling of the evidence.

Ratio Decidendi: The court reaffirmed that an appellate court can reevaluate evidence but must respect the presumption of innocence and the trial court's findings unless substantial inconsistencies warrant interference.

Result: The appeal is dismissed, and the acquittal order is upheld.

Table of Content
1. appeal against acquittal of sexual offence. (Para 1)
2. credibility of prosecutrix’s statement highlighted. (Para 2)
3. court's observations on evidence credibility. (Para 3 , 7)
4. factual background of the case. (Para 4 , 5)
5. trial court's proceedings and charges. (Para 6)
6. appellate court's power to re-evaluate evidence. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)
7. importance of prosecutrix's statement in sexual offences. (Para 11)
8. contradictions in prosecutrix's statements undermine credibility. (Para 12 , 13)
9. consensual relationship established; lack of evidence for claims. (Para 14 , 15)
10. delay in filing fir affects prosecutrix’s case. (Para 16 , 17)
11. summary of prosecutrix and respondent's relationship. (Para 18)
12. conclusion on evidence acceptance and acquittal. (Para 19)
13. final judgment dismissing the appeal and acquitting the respondent. (Para 20 , 21)

Judgment

Mr. Kuldeep Tiwari, J.

The instant appeal is directed against the order of acquittal dated 22.12.2021 rendered by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jind, whereby, the respondent No.2 has been acquitted qua the charges framed against him, under Sections 354 (D), 376(2)(N), and, 506 of INDIAN PENAL CODE (hereinafter referred to as “IPC”), in case FIR No. 178 dated 31.08.2018, registered at Police Station: Women, Jind, District Jind.

2. The appellant has challenged the order of acquittal, on the averments that the learned trial Court has not appreciated, in its right perspective, the credible evidence as led by the prosecution, whereas, the statement of the prosecutrix (identity of the prosecutrix is withheld in view of provision of Section 228(A) of IPC) (hereinafter referred to as the “prosecutrix”), alone was sufficient to bring home the guilt of the respondent No.2, as the defence has totally failed in its efforts to impeach the veracity of her statement. Reliance has mainly been placed upon the statement of the prosecutrix, on the ground that, in a case involving sexual offences, the statement of prosecutrix does not require any corroboration to prove the commission of such offences by the wrongdoer(s). It is further averred that the statement of a rape victim is to be considered, at par with the statement of an injured victim, and therefore, weighty credence ought to have been imparted to the statement of the prosecutrix by the learned trial Court, whereas, the learned trial Court erred by placing reliance to the minor contradictions to reach at a finding of acquittal, rather, has misdirected itself.

3. Before we deal with the legality of the impugned order of acquittal, it is apt to first deal with the factual aspects of the present case.

FACTUAL MATRIX

4. The prosecution agency was set into motion, upon a complaint (Ex. P5) being moved in Women Police Station, Jind, on 31.08.2018, by the prosecutrix, which reads as under:-

“I was taking tuition at near Government College, Jind, in the year 2011, and, aforesaid used to misbehave with me upon my visit there, to which I objected. He wanted to befriend me and used to follow me. He also used to tell me that he has fallen in love with me. He used to harass me every day and when I tried to move a complaint against him to police, he threatened to commit suicide and to put the blame on me, whereupon, I got frightened. He told me that he cannot live without me, but, I kept on evading him for some day. After a few days, I received a telephonic call, wherein, the caller disclosed himself to be and told me that has consumed spray, and, is admitted in Rohtak Hospital. On the next day, I received telephonic call of who threatened me that if I did not accept his love proposal, he will die. Because such a thing had happened for the first time in my life, therefore, I believed his words and got emotional and I accepted his proposal to save his life. However, his intentions were dishonest from the very beginning and he wanted to blackmail me by making me emotional. After some time, he told me that he wanted to marry me, a