Penal Code, 1860 – ss. 376, 452 and 506 – Acquittal under – Allegation that appellant committed offence against the prosecutrix (PW-6) u/s. 376 at her residence – The appellant-accused was charged and convicted u/ss. 376, 452 and 506 by the Trial Court and the same was confirmed by the High Court – On appeal, held: There was delay in filing complaint – There was no attempt to recover the knife from the appellant as it is a specific case of the prosecution that he committed the offence by threatening to harm the prosecutrix – There was no reason as to non-examination of the sole eye witness i.e. brother of the PW-6 – The High Court has recorded a wrong factual finding that the offence u/s.376 was committed even at the uncle’s residence of PW-6 which was not the case spoken by her – The case of the prosecution does not conform to the degree of probability – Evidence would also suggest that PW-4 was not willing to give his daughter in marriage to appellant, FIR also speaks about the same – Conviction and sentence set aside – Appeal allowed – Appellant acquitted of all charges.
Rajesh Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2022) 12 SCC 200; Takhaji Hiraji v. Thakore Kubersing Chamansing (2001) 6 SCC 145 – relied on.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.