Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
SUBHASH VIDYARTHI
Tariq @ Lohiya – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. question of evidence and burden of proof. (Para 1 , 29 , 36 , 57) |
| 2. examination of victim and inconsistencies in testimonies. (Para 5 , 6 , 10 , 12 , 28) |
| 3. impact of forensic evidence and medical examination results. (Para 19 , 24 , 25 , 51) |
| 4. exceptions for enhancement of statutory standards required. (Para 58 , 60) |
JUDGMENT :
1. By means of the instant criminal appeal filed under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C., the applicant has challenged the validity of the judgment and order dated 26.07.2018 passed by Sri Ram Suchit, the learned Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge, POCSO Act, Court No.8, Sitapur in Special Sessions Trial No. 1 of 2016 arising out of Case Crime No. 268 of 2015, under Sections 363 , 366, 376 IPC and Section 3 /4 POCSO Act, Police Station Sadarpur, District Sitapur.
3. It is recorded in the case diary that the informant had come to the police station along with a written complaint on 15.11.2015 and upon this complaint, an FIR bearing Case Crime No. 268 of 2018 was lodged in Police Station Sadarpur, District Sitapur at 13:10 on 15.11.2015, under Sections 3 63 , 366 IPC.
5. The victim was taken to District Women Hospital, Sitapur for her medico legal ex
Prosecution must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt in sexual offences; inconsistent statements and lack of evidence weaken claims against the accused.
The presumption under the POCSO Act is rebuttable and requires foundational facts to be established beyond reasonable doubt for conviction.
The court affirmed that the victim's testimony, corroborated by medical evidence, is sufficient for conviction in rape cases, even with minor inconsistencies.
The judgment emphasizes the importance of the victim's reliable and confident statement, the significance of discrepancies, belated reporting, and lack of corroboration and support from family member....
The prosecution failed to prove the victim's age and the occurrence of the alleged incident beyond reasonable doubt, leading to the appellant's acquittal.
The prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt due to inconsistencies in the victim's testimony and unnatural conduct of the victim and her mother.
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
