IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Satyendra Kumar Singh, J.
Munna@ Rafiq v. State of M.P.
Criminal Appeal No. 810 of 1999 (J); Decided on 2.9.2022*
Penal Code, 1860 -- S. 376 (1) -- rape -- none of three children woke up at time of incident -- appears unnatural -- no external or internal injury found on body of prosecutrix in medical examination -- female witness of incident turned hostile -- statements of prosecutrix also contradictory -- case of prosecution not proved beyond reasonable doubt in absence of any corroborative evidence -- defence of her being consenting party cannot be ruled out -- trial Court committed error in holding appellant guilty only on basis of sole evidence of prosecutrix -- appellant deserves to get benefit of doubt -- conviction set aside. [Para 12]
naM lafgrk] 1860 & /kkjk 376 ¼1½ & cykRlax & ?kVuk ds le; rhu larkuksa esa ls dksbZ ugha tkxk & vLokHkkfod Árhr gksrk gS & fpfdRlh; tkap esa vfHk;ksD=h ds 'kjhj ij dksbZ ckg~; ;k vkarfjd {kfr ugha ikbZ xbZ & ?kVuk dh efgyk lk{kh i{kæksgh gks xbZ & vfHk;ksD=h ds dFku Hkh fojks/kkHkklh & laiqf"Vdkjh lk{; ds vHkko esa vfHk;kstu dk ekeyk ;qfDr;qDr lansg ds ijs lkfcr ugha & vfHk;ksD=h ds lEer i{kdkj gksus dh Áfrj{kk ls bUdkj ugha fd;k tk ldrk & fopkj.k U;k;ky; us vihykFkhZ dks dsoy vfHk;ksD=h ds ,dek= lk{; ds vk/kkj ij nks"kh Bgjkdj xyrh dh & vihykFkhZ lansg dk Qk;nk ÁkIr djus dk ik= & nks"kflf) vikLrA ¼iSjk 12½
JUDGEMENT
1. The appellant has preferred this appeal under section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) [in short “Cr.P.C.”] against the judgement dated 31.3.1999 passed by the Court of Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Indore (M.P.) in Special Case No.81/97, for the offences punishable under sections 450 and 376(1) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short “IPC”) and section 3(1)(11) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short “SC/ST Act”) and sentenced him as under:
| S. No. | Conviction | Sentence | ||
| Imprisonment | Fine amount | Additional imprisonment in default of payment of fine | ||
| 1. | 450 of IPC | 5 years RI | -- | -- |
| 2. | 376(1) of IPC | 7 years RI | -- | -- |
| 3. | 3(1)(11) of SC/ST Act | 6 months RI | Rs. 500/- | 1 month RI |
2. Prosecution story, in brief is as follows :-
(i) Prosecutrix, who is a member of the Scheduled Castes/Schedule Tribe community was residing with her family in village Malikhedi for last about six months. On 22.1.1995 in the evening when her husband had gone to irrigate Narayan Khati's field and prosecutrix was alone with her kids, then in the intervening night of 22-23.1.1995, at about 1.00 am., appellant entered into her house by breaking the ceiling of their house and on the point of knife threatened her to kill and committed rape upon her. Prosecutrix pretending to attend nature's call came out of her house and cried for help then, her neighbour Ramkunwarbai came there. Appellant also came there and threatening Ramkunwarbai, fled away from the spot. Prosecutrix went to Santosh Khati's house, called her husband and narrated the incident to him and thereafter went to police station Kshipra, Indore and made complaint against the appellant, on the basis of which, at about 14.15 PM, SI Mahendra S. Bhadoriya lodged the FIR (Exhibit-P/1) and sent the prosecutrix to M. Y. Hospital, Indore for medial examination, where on the same day at about 7.50 PM, Dr. Aparna Singh medically examined her and prepared the MLC report (Exhibit-P/6). She also preserved and prepared her vaginal smear slides, collected her public hairs and sealed the same alongwith her inner-wear (petticoat) and handed over the same to the police constable who brought her to the hospital.
(ii) As the matter relates to SC/ST Act therefore, investigation was transferred to police station AJAK, Indore. On the same day i.e. 23.1.1995, Investigating Officer A. K. Dubey went to the place of occurrence, prepared spot map (Exhibit-P/7) and recorded the statements of the prosecutrix as well as other prosecution witnesses. On 20.3.1995, he arrested the appellant, as per arrest memo (ExhibitP/9) and recorded his disclosure statement (Exhibit-P/10), on the basis of which on his instance, seized the weapon knife, used in the crime, as per seizure memo (Exhibit-P/11). Vide application (Exhibit-P/5) sent the appellant to M. Y. Hospital, Indore for medical examination where Dr. A. K. Jain medically examined him and found him capable of doing sexual activities, prepared MLC report (Exhibit-P/5). During investigation, he obtained caste certificate (Exhibit-P/12) of the prosecutrix and seized the same, as per seizure memo (Exhibit-P/13) and vide letter (Exhibit-P/14) sent the seized articles to the Forensic Science Laboratory, District Indore for chemical examination. After completion of investigation, filed the charge-sheet before the Court of Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Indore.
3. Learned trial Court considering the material prima-facie available on record, framed the charges under sections 450 and 376(1) of IPC alongwith section 3(1)(11) of SC/ST Act against the appellant, who abjured his guilt and prayed for trial. In his statement recorded under section 313 of Cr.P.C., the appellant pleaded his false implication in the matter. In support of his defense, he did not examine any witness.
The court ruled that corroborative evidence is essential for rape allegations, leading to acquittal on those charges while a conviction for assault was upheld based on credible evidence.
The exemplification of evidential requirements under the SCST Act highlights that mere membership to a scheduled category does not automatically substantiate charges without compelling evidence.
The court reinforced that the sole testimony of the prosecutrix, if credible, can be sufficient for conviction in sexual assault cases.
The conviction for rape was upheld based on the prosecutrix's credible testimony, while the conviction under the SC/ST Act was quashed due to lack of evidence regarding the accused's knowledge of the....
The testimony of a victim in a rape case stands at a higher pedestal than injured witness and needs no corroboration. The evidence of a victim of sexual assault should be treated with utmost sensitiv....
The evidence of a prosecutrix must be credible and consistent for a conviction in rape cases; contradictions and lack of supporting evidence can lead to acquittal.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.