The Calcutta High Court recently set aside a rape accused’s conviction order under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), while stating that the physical relationship between the appellant and the victim was consensual and the victim’s age was not conclusively established by the prosecution before the Trial Court.
A division judge bench of Justices Debangsu Basak and Md Shabbar Rashidi was hearing an appeal against the conviction order dated January 18, 2021, passed by Trial court Berhampore.
The bench while setting aside the conviction order stated that the evidence of the prosecution established that there was a relationship between the appellant and the victim. Further, the relationship between the victim and appellant was consensual in nature.
“It is trite law that when two views are possible then the one that favours the accused should be accepted,” the court said.
The girl submitted a written complaint against the appellant, alleging that he raped her multiple times and she got pregnant. The police filed a First Information Report (FIR) against the accused based on the allegation under Sections 417 (cheating) and 376 (rape) of the IPC. The appellant agreed to marry her. However, the appellant refused to marry her subsequently.
The prosecution’s case was that the appellant raped the girl, who was a minor aged about 13 years, on various days. In her deposition before the trial court she mentioned a relationship of 10 years that she had with the appellant. She stated that she was 12/13 years at the time of the incident. Later, she got pregnant and a male child was born.
The main question in the cross examination was victim’s age. She denied that she was 37 years old at the time of deposition. However, she admitted that she wanted to marry the appellant and thus filed the case with “this story”.
The father, grandfather and cousin of the girl stated that they were not eyewitness to the incident. The maternal uncle stated about the relationship between girl and the appellant.
The trial court convicted the appellant for committing rape by order dated January 18, 2021. Thus, an appeal was preferred before this bench challenging the order.
The present court was dealing with two issues:
- Is the appellant guilty as charged?
- Was the victim a minor at the time of the occurrence of this incident?
The court, while dealing with the first issue, mentioned that accused can be convicted on the strength of the testimony of a rape victim provided that such testimony inspires confidence and is trustworthy. In this scenario, victim’s testimony and her subsequent conduct does not inspire confidence of the Court as to her claims.
Thus, the bench set aside the charges levied on the appellant.
Further, the court noted that DNA test had clearly established that appellant was the father of the child born. Further the court observed that she claimed rape in her deposition, but the claim of rape is not corroborated by any other witnesses examined by the prosecution, also there is no eyewitness to the same.
The Court said that the girl’s age was not conclusively established at the trial. Although, she had denied that she was 37 years old at the time of her deposition which makes her about 24 years when the incident occurred. Also the prosecution did not produce any birth certificate of the victim at the trial.
“It is plausible to take a view that the physical relationship which developed between the appellant and the victim was consensual in nature. Age of the victim was not conclusively established. We are not in a position to conclusively say that the appellant entered into a physical relationship with a minor. Hence, the prosecution had failed to establish the age of the victim at the time of the incident,” the court said.
Accordingly, the bench set aside the impugned judgment of conviction and acquitted the appellant.
Read all the Latest India News and Karnataka Elections 2023 updates here
Comments
0 comment