Back
B. BHATTACHARJEE
Faster Bareh – Appellant
Versus
State of Meghalaya Rep. By Chief Secretary – Respondent
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
Mr. B. Bhattacharjee, J. - This appeal under Section 374(4) CrPC has been filed against the impugned Judgment and Order dated 17.04.2023 and the Order of Sentence of even date passed by the learned Sessions Judge, East Jaintia Hills District, Khliehriat, in Sessions Case No. 11 of 2022 convicting the appellant under Section 376 IPC and sentencing him to five years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) only.
1. The fact of the case in brief is that on 15.06.2012, a written FIR was lodged by the PW-2(sister of the survivor) before the Officer -In-Charge, Khliehriat Police Station, alleging that on 14.06.2012 at around 8:30 PM the survivor was raped by the appellant at a place called Satad Jalaphet. On the basis of the said FIR, the Khliehriat PS Case No. 99(6)12 under Section 376 IPC was registered and investigated into. During the course of investigation, a prima facie case under Section 376 IPC was found well established against the appellant and accordingly a charge sheet vide CS No. 139/13 dated 20.11.2013 under Section 376 IPC was filed. On 09.03.2022, charge under Section 376 IPC was framed against the appellant and the matter proce
The court established that the survivor's conduct and the inconsistencies in her testimony raised reasonable doubt about the prosecution's case, necessitating acquittal.
The judgment establishes that convictions under POCSO require substantive evidence, and reliance on inadmissible statements can lead to acquittal.
The conviction of the appellant for sexual offences under IPC and the Goa Children's Act was upheld based on consistent testimony of the victim, emphasizing the necessity of protecting child victims ....
The prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, and inconsistencies in the survivor's testimony led to the acquittal of the accused.
Rape – There is no rule of law or practice that evidence of prosecutrix cannot be relied upon without corroboration.
The Court established that minor contradictions in a victim's testimony should not discredit credible evidence in a rape case; corroboration is not mandatory if the victim's evidence inspires confide....
The conviction cannot be based solely on the testimony of the prosecutrix if it is full of contradictions and lacks corroborative evidence.
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
