Contradiction On Case's Crucial Aspects Totally Discredits Witness Statement, Makes It Unreliable: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

A bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar observed:

“It is true that even if defence is successful in contradicting a witness, it would not always mean that the contradiction in her two statements would result in totally discrediting this witness but when the contradiction relates to vital aspects of the case and the version of occurrence given in previous statement by a witness is entirely different from the version of occurrence given by such witness during the trial of the case, it does definitely make the statement of such witness unreliable and untrustworthy”.

These observations were made while hearing a Criminal appeal moved by the State against a judgment of the trial court which acquitted the respondents who had been accused of offences, including rape, under Section 363, 376, 343, 506 and 109 RPC.

The case revolved around a missing persons report filed by PW1, the father of the prosecutrix, on 23.12.2005. The prosecutrix, initially reported missing, was later found in Central Jail, Jammu, and claimed that she had been abducted and raped by the respondents. Subsequently, a case was registered in 2006, leading to charges against the respondents.

During the trial, the prosecution stated that the prosecutrix was enticed by the respondents and another girl, taken in a white Maruti car, to Jaipur against her wishes, and those of her guardians, since she was a 17-year-old minor on the date of occurrence.

The prosecution presented 12 witnesses, including the prosecutrix, while the respondents denied the charges.

The trial court, after analyzing the evidence, acquitted the accused upon observing that the version of occurrence given by the prosecutrix during the trial was entirely different from the version given by her in her statement under Section 161 CrPC and hence the prosecution case could not be believed.

Assailing the acquittal, the appellants argued that the charges against the respondents were clearly established through the statements of the prosecutrix and other prosecution witnesses and the acquittal had resulted in a miscarriage of justice.

It was contended by the appellants that a conviction could be recorded on the basis of a rape victim's sole statement, without any corroboration, and that in the present case, in spite of there being a credible statement by the prosecutrix, the trial court had discarded the same on "flimsy grounds."

In perusing her statement recorded during the trial, and the statement of the Investigating Officer, the bench noted major contradictions in her statements on crucial aspects of the case.

Court said that although contradictions in witness statements do not totally discredit them, contradictions on the vital aspects of the matter do 'dent their reliability and trustworthiness.'

While appreciating the argument that a conviction may be based on the solitary statement of a victim of rape, the court clarified that such a statement should be "unblemished and of sterling quality."

“In the instant case, as already discussed, the statement of the prosecutrix is unworthy of credit. Therefore, the accused cannot be held guilty on the basis of the said statement. There is no corroboration to her statement”, the court recorded.

Accordingly, in referring to an ongoing dispute between the father of the prosecutrix and the accused, the Court concluded that the impugned judgment of acquittal passed by the trial court warranted no interference.

Thus the appeals were dismissed. 

Case Title: STATE OF J&K Vs FEROZ AHMAD NAJAR & ANR.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 299

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment