Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(All) 2878

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, SYED AFTAB HUSAIN RIZVI, JJ.
Maudhu - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.4735 of 2013
Decided on : 22-11-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Jag Narayan, Sanjeev Mishra Gana, T.C.Shama, Rajiv Lochan Shukla
For the Respondent:Govt. Advocate, Prashant Saxena

The conviction under Section 376 IPC emphasizes that a victim's sole testimony, despite minor discrepancies, is substantial and should not be discarded easily, affirming the need for sensitivity in adjudicating sexual assault cases.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Section 376 - Criminal Procedure Code - Section 164 - Conviction for sexual assault - The accused was sentenced to life imprisonment and fine after being found guilty under Section 376 IPC based on the victim's testimony and medical evidence. Delay in lodging the FIR was not found to affect the prosecution case adversely. The age of the victim was established as being around 15 years, leading to a mandatory life sentence. (Paras 1, 24, 28)

(B) Criminal trials - Guidelines on evidence - Courts must treat evidence from a victim of sexual assault with utmost sensitivity. Minor discrepancies in testimonies may not warrant discarding the reliability of the victim's statement. (Paras 24, 25)

Facts of the case:
The accused was convicted for the sexual assault of a 15-year-old girl, where the incident occurred while she was outside her home. Despite the lack of external injuries, medical examinations confirmed internal trauma consistent with assault. The FIR was lodged the day after the incident. (Paras 6, 11)

Findings of Court:
The evidence from the victim, supported by medical findings, was deemed credible, and there was no significant contradiction affecting the outcome. The trial court's finding of guilt was upheld as just and proper. (Paras 23, 25)

Issues: The main considerations revolved around the credibility of the victim's testimony, the implications of minor discrepancies in her statement, and whether the evidence supported the conviction under Section 376 IPC. (Paras 16-21)

Ratio Decidendi: The court affirmed that the victim's testimony should be given substantial weight, highlighting a legal principle that in sexual assault cases, the evidence of the victim is compelling, and hesitation to believe due to minor inconsistencies is unjustified. (Paras 24-25)

Result: The appeal is partly allowed; the conviction is sustained, but the sentence is modified to the period already served. (Paras 28, 29)

Table of Content
1. overview of the appeal and initial trial details. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. supporting testimonies and evidence presented in trial. (Para 4 , 11)
3. defense arguments challenging the prosecution's evidence. (Para 5 , 16 , 17 , 22)
4. medical evidence and its implications on the case. (Para 6 , 7 , 19 , 23)
5. testimony analysis and credibility considerations. (Para 8 , 20 , 21)
6. counterpoints from defense witnesses and their reliability. (Para 9 , 14 , 15 , 18)
7. incident details and evidence collection (Para 10)
8. court's stance on the admissibility of victim testimony. (Para 24 , 25)
9. modification of the sentence and considerations for justice. (Para 28 , 29)
10. final orders and procedural follow-ups based on the judgment. (Para 30 , 31 , 32)

JUDGMENT :

Hon’ble S.A.H. Rizvi J.

1. The present appeal has been filed on behalf of the accused-appellant-Maudhu, who has been convicted by judgment and order dated 10.10.2013 passed by Sessions Judge, Farrukhabad in Session Trial No.153 of 2010 ( State of U.P. vs. Maudhu ) arising out of Case Crime No.374 of 2009, under Sections 376 I.P.C., Police Station- Amritpur, District- Farrukhabad and sentenced the appellant to life imprisonment & fine of Rs.20,000/-.

2. The informant presented a written report dated 10.09.2009 scribed by Tilakram Awasthi at P.S.- Amritpur, District- Farrukhabad, alleging therein that today on 09.09.2009 her 15-year-old daughter had gone outside the village to ease herself. When she sat down in the curvy field of Maniram, Maudhu Jatav of the village came there and with ill intention pulled her down on the ground. His daughter resisted and made a noise then the accused ran away from the spot. His daughter came to the house and narrated the entire incident, to the informant and other family members, who consulted and thereafter informant came with the victim to lodge the report. On the aforesaid written information, Case Crime No.374 of 2009 under Section 376 /511 I.P.C. was registered and investigation was entrusted to S.I. Shiv Singh. The victim was sent for medical examination, the Investigating Officer recorded the statement of Chik and GD Writer. Further investigation was conducted by S.I. Chhatrasal Shivhare. He arrested the accused on 10.09.2009 and recorded his statement. He collected the medical examination report and supplementary report of the victim and on its basis amended the case under Section 376 I.P.C. Thereafter, he recorded the statement of the victim, the informant, and other witnesses, collected the pot (lota), and prepared its memo. The statement of the victim was also got recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The Investigating Officer inspected the place of occurrence and prepared the site plan at the pointing out of the informant and the victim. Based on evidence collected during the investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted against the accused for offence under Section 376 I.P.C. The learned Magistrate took cognizance and committed the case to the Court of Sessions.

3. The learned trial Court framed a charge under Section 376 I.P.C. against the accused, who pleaded not guilty and claimed for trial.

4. Prosecution produced informant as P.W.-1, victim as P.W.-2 and three formal witnesses, Dr. Achala, P.W.-3, S.I. Chatrashal Shiv Hare P.W.-4, the Investigating Officer, constable clerk Ram Saran Chaudhary P.W.-5, the chik and GD writer. The prosecution witnesses have proved nine documents Ext. Ka-1 to ka-9.

5. The statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded. The accused has denied the allegations made against him by the prosecution witnesses. He has also stated that a false report has been lodged against him and he has been falsely implicated as he refused to do the begar. Two witnesses Chetram D.W.-1 and Smt. Neelam D.W.-2 have been produced by the defence. The learned trial Court after hearing the arguments of both the parties by the impugned judgment and order has held the appellant-accused guilty of offence unde