Patna High Court Acquits Rape Accused, Finds Victim’s Statement Unreliable

The Patna High Court acquitted an accused in a rape case on the grounds that the victim’s statement was unreliable. The court noted that the victim’s statement in court differed significantly from her initial written statement to the police and that there were serious contradictions in both her statement and her behavior, making her unreliable.

Upon examination of the recorded material evidence, the delegation Judges Ashutosh Kumar and Jitendra Kumar observed, “We are aware that since he has no accomplice and is based on an injured witness, the defendant can be convicted solely on the prosecutor’s testimony, without the need for his testimony to be confirmed. However, for such a conviction, the prosecutor must be reliable and give confidence to the court. “There must definitely be a witness.”

“However, in the current case, it became clear that the prosecutor did not appear to be honest and trustworthy. “Not only has he significantly improved his testimony before the court from his written statement to the police, but there are also serious contradictions in his testimony and behavior that make him unreliable and unreliable.” section bank added.

The decision came by way of an appeal challenging the decision of the sessions court; wherein the sole appellant was convicted for offenses punishable under Sections 376, 342 and 120 (B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the POCSO Act.

The court first addressed the question of whether the victim was a child at the time of the alleged incident. The court explained that the victim’s age should first be determined according to the birth certificate obtained from the school or the license certificate, if any. In their absence, the birth certificate issued by the municipal authorities or Panchayats should be taken into consideration.

“In the absence of the above-mentioned certificates, the age of the victim needs to be determined by ossification test or any other recent medical test. Other evidence, such as oral evidence, is implicitly excluded from consideration in determining the age of the victim.” The court noted.

The court noted that though the victim was a school student, neither school certificate nor birth certificate from Panchayat or Municipal authorities was produced by the prosecution despite the legal requirement. Additionally, no ossification tests or medical examinations were performed to determine his age.

As a result, the Court held that the prosecution failed to prove the age of the victim as per the procedure prescribed under Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. The court concluded that the victim was not a child at the time of the incident and: therefore, the provisions of the POCSO Act did not apply and hence acquitted the appellant of the charge under Section 6 of the POCSO Act.

The Court then examined whether the prosecution had proven the charges under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) beyond reasonable doubt.

The court noted that the victim was the only eyewitness to the alleged incident, while the other witnesses testified only about the circumstances before and after the incident.

The court found that there was reasonable doubt as to whether force or pressure was applied to the victim. Additionally, the medical evidence did not support the prosecution’s claim.

Therefore, the Court held that: “The prosecution has disastrously failed to prove the charges against the appellant beyond all reasonable doubt under the Indian Penal Code. It is extremely unsafe to uphold the conviction against the appellant. Therefore, the appellant deserves to be acquitted on the benefit of doubt. Therefore, the conviction and sentence given against the appellant are not sustainable in terms of law.”

Accordingly, the appeal was allowed and the appellant was acquitted of the charges against him.

Case Title: Mannu Vs. Bihar State

LL Quote: 2024 LiveLaw (Pat) 109

Click to Read the Order