Back
2016 Supreme(All) 3855
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Ranjana Pandya, J.
Hari Shanker Chaurasiya & Others - Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. & Others - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 392 of 1996
Decided On : 24-10-2016
For the Appellant :- K.S. Pawar,Dhirendra Singh,P.N.Asthana,Ram Naresh Shukla,Virendra Mohan
For the Respondent:- Govt. Advocate
Headnote:
Rape - Criminal Law - IPC 342, 366, 376 - The judgment discusses the lodging of the report, recovery of the victim, contradictions in the victim's statement, and absence of injuries. The court emphasizes the reliability of the victim's testimony, the requirement of corroboration, and the credibility of the prosecutrix. The judgment highlights the importance of medical evidence and the need for a consistent and credible statement from the victim.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the appeal against the conviction of the accused for charges under Section 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution alleged that the accused had raped a girl in a room at a transport company's premises.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence presented by the prosecution was unreliable and contradictory. It highlighted the absence of injuries on the victim's body and the discrepancies in her statements. The court concluded that the prosecution's case was improbable and doubtful.
Issues: The key issues revolved around the reliability of the victim's testimony, the requirement for corroboration in rape cases, and the credibility of the prosecutrix.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of a consistent and credible statement from the victim in cases of rape. It also highlighted the need for medical evidence and the requirement for corroboration in certain circumstances.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and the conviction of the appellants under Sections 342, 366, 376 of the IPC was set aside. The appellants were directed to comply with the provisions of Section 437-A Cr.P.C, and those in jail were ordered to be released forthwith.
Ranjana Pandya, J.
1. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment and order dated 23.08.1996, passed by Second Additional Sessions Judge, Barabanki, in Sessions Trial No. 417 of 1992 (State vs. Hari Shankar Chaurasiya and others), registered as Case Crime No. 775 of 1991, under Sections 342, 366, 376 I.P.C., Police station Kotwali, District Barabanki, whereby, all the appellants were acquitted for the charges under Section 366 I.P.C. the accused were found guilty and sentenced for 5 years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 376 I.P.C. coupled with a fine of Rs. 1000/- each with default stipulation. Each of the accused was further sentenced to 3 months rigorous imprisonment under Section 342 I.P.C.
2. Filtering out unnecessary details, the prosecution case in brief is that a report was lodged by one Lalloo Awasthi stating that at the flat of Shiv Karan Singh Chaurasiya, transport company is being run. In one of the rooms of the transport company, the servants of Shiv Karan Singh namely Vijay and Bharat have closed the room and committed rape on a girl. The girl is raising alarm from inside the room. The informant Lalloo Awasthi made his companion Udai Narayan stand near the place of occurrence and came to inform the police.
3. On the basis of this information received by the police on 15.09.1991, the police proceeded for the spot. Hari Shanker Chaurasiya was found at the place of incident. The other room was locked from outside. Hari Shanker Chaurasiya opened the lock and a girl was found in the room. Both the accused Vijay Sharma and Bharat fled away. The victim told the police personnel that the accused had closed her in the room and had raped her. The accused Hari Shanker Chaurasiya was apprehended on the spot and recovery memo was prepared. On the basis of the information received by the police by Lalloo Awasthi, PW-1 C.P. Kailash Nath scribed the chik report which was proved by this witness as Exhibit Ka-1. He further proved the copy of G.D. as Exhibit Ka-2. Dr. Atika Sabbuddin PW-2 has medically examined the victim. She did not find any external or internal injuries on the body of the victim. She proved the medical report as Exhibit Ka-3. The victim was sent for determination of age and the radio logical report was proved by this witness as Exhibit Ka-4. Further this witness proved the pathological report as Exhibit Ka-5.
4. The investigation of the matter was entrusted to PW-5 S.I. O.P. Mishra who coped the chik report in the case diary. He went to the spot and recovered the victim in the presence of the witness Udai Narain and Sudhir Kumar. He prepared the recovery memo which was proved by this witness as Exhibit Ka-4. Hari Shanker Chaurasiya, who was arrested on the spot, his statement was recorded, thereafter the statement of the witnesses were recorded. Further this witness inspected the spot at the pointing out of the victim and proved the site plan as Exhibit Ka-7. He recorded the statements of Sudheer and Udai Narain. On 16.09.1991, the victim was sent for medical examination with the lady constable. On 05.10.1991, copy of the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was received by this witness. The accused Vijay Sharma and Bharat Bhushan surrendered before the court on 30.09.1991. Their statements were recorded on the same day. The application for obtaining copy of the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was proved by this witness as Exhibit Ka-8. Investigation ended into a charge sheet which was proved by this witness as Exhibit Ka-9.
5. PW-3 is the victim who has stated about the incident. PW-4 is Lalloo who is said to be the scribe. This witness was declared hostile by the prosecution who proceed to cross-examine this witness. PW-5 is S.I. O.P. Mishra. PW-6 is Munna @ Sudhir who has stated that on 15.09.1991 at 06: 00 P.M., he saw the premises of Chaurasiya Transport Company, crowded. He was alone. No girl was recovered in his presence from the premises. He was also declared hostile and cros
