Patna High Court Acquits Rape Accused, Finds Victim's Testimony Unreliable
The Patna High Court has acquitted an accused in a rape case, finding the victim's testimony to be unreliable. The Court noted that the victim's statement in court significantly differed from her initial written statement to the police, and there were serious contradictions in both her statement and her conduct, making her untrustworthy.Upon perusing the material evidence placed on record,...
The Patna High Court has acquitted an accused in a rape case, finding the victim's testimony to be unreliable. The Court noted that the victim's statement in court significantly differed from her initial written statement to the police, and there were serious contradictions in both her statement and her conduct, making her untrustworthy.
Upon perusing the material evidence placed on record, the bench comprising Justices Ashutosh Kumar and Jitendra Kumar observed, “We are conscious of the law that on the sole testimony of prosecutrix, accused may be convicted without corroboration of her testimony because she is not an accomplice and stands on the footing of an injured witness. But for such conviction, the prosecutrix is required to be trustworthy, inspiring confidence of the court. She must be sterling witness.”
“But in the case on hand, it is found that the prosecutrix does not appear to be truthful and trustworthy. She has not only drastically improved her statement before the Court differing with her written statement given to the police, there are serious inherent contradictions in her statement and conduct rendering her unreliable and untrustworthy,” the division bench added.
The judgement came in an appeal challenging the sessions court's decision, whereby the sole appellant was convicted for the offences 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 clarified that the age of the victim should be determined primarily by the birth certificate from the school or matriculation certificate, if available. And in the absence of these, the birth certificate issued by municipal authorities or Panchayats should be considered.
“In the absence of the aforesaid certificates, the age of the victim is required to be determined by ossification test or any other latest medical test. Any other proof like oral evidence is impliedly excluded from consideration for determination of the age of the victim,” the Court pointed out.
The Court noted that while the victim was a school student, neither a school certificate nor a birth certificate from the Panchayat or Municipal authorities was presented by the prosecution, despite the legal requirement. Additionally, no ossification test or medical examination was conducted to establish her age.
As a result, the Court held that the prosecution failed to prove the victim's age according to the prescribed procedure 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 thus it acquitted the appellant of the charge under Section 6 of the POCSO Act.
Next, the Court examined whether the prosecution had proven the charges under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) beyond a reasonable doubt.
The Court pointed out that the victim was the sole eyewitness to the alleged event, while other witnesses only provided evidence regarding pre- and post-incident circumstances.
The Court found that there were reasonable doubts regarding whether force or coercion was applied to the victim. Additionally, the medical evidence did not support the prosecution's case.
The Court, thus, held, “the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the charges framed under the Indian Penal Code against the appellant beyond all reasonable doubts. It is very unsafe to uphold the judgment of conviction against the appellant. The appellant, therefore, deserves to be acquitted giving benefit of doubts. Accordingly, the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence against the appellant are not sustainable in the eyes of law.”
Accordingly, the appeal was allowed, and the appellant was acquitted of the charges levelled against him.
Case Title: Mannu Vs. State of Bihar
LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Pat) 109