Telangana High Court Sets Aside Rape Conviction Due To 'Suspicious & Vengeful Evidence With Improvements & Embellishments'

The Telangana High Court has held that when a victim of rape does not disclose specific details in the complaint and several instances are narrated at a belated time during the trial, such evidence is marred with improvements and embellishments and does not fall into the category of 'sterling' evidence.

In allowing the appeal, and overturning the appellant's conviction by the trial court, a single bench of Justice K Surender held:

“The said version given in the Court cannot be relied upon when no reasons are given as to why such specific details were not narrated either in the complaint or in the subsequent examination by the police under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. In the present case, the evidence of PW1 marred with improvements and embellishments does not fall into the category of evidence of 'sterling' quality but suspicious and vengeful.”

It was submitted by the victim that the accused had been following her and professing his love to her, leading to her accepting his proposal. The victim submitted that the accused promised to marry her and started to pressurise her for a physical relationship.

The victim averred to agreeing to the same based on the promise made by the accused of marrying her.

It was argued that when the accused completely refused to marry her, a complaint was preferred by the victim.

When the trial commenced, the victim further submitted that the accused had also administered some pills to her due to which she had also suffered a miscarriage.

The grounds raised by the accused in the appeal were that the complaint and the deposition given by the victim were contradictory and given after 3 years.

Moreover, it was contended that the victim had not disclosed any details in her complaint, and the deposition given by her was the outcome of an afterthought.

Having considered the facts, and finding that the evidence framed to falsely accuse the appellant, Justice Surender overturned the conviction and held:

“The complaint was given after being in physical relation with the appellant for six years. It is unlikely that so many details and events would not have been mentioned in the complaint. It is not the case that the complaint was given when she was not in proper frame of mind or that she was under any kind of influence. The details and incidents were also not stated during examination by the police under Section 161 Cr.P.C. The said development during the examination before the Court clearly suggests that evidence was given to falsely implicate the appellant...”

Thus criminal appeal was allowed.

CrlA No. 400 of 2021.

Counsel for petitioner: B.Shankar

Counsel for respondent: Public Prosecutor

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment