Rai Sandeep @ Deepu Vs. State (NCT) of Delhi
|
Head Note
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Section 376 (2)
Rape Case - Acquittal of accused in gang rape case - Prosecution version that two accused persons entered the house of prosecutrix at night time and committed rape - FIR lodged after 13 hours delay - Accused acquitted on following grounds - (i) Case based solely on the evidence of prosecutrix - No evidence to show that she was sterling witness - A sterling witness is one whose version can be accepted by the Court without any corroboration and based on which the guilty can be punished. (ii) There is total variation in her version from what was stated in the complaint and what was deposed before the Court at the time of trial. (iii) She stated that after rape accused wiped their private parts with socks - As per FSL Report socks did not contain any semblance of semen on it. (iv) As per prosecutrix, socks were seized from her in hospital but according to the seizure memo the socks was recovered from the place of occurrence. (v) In the complaint, prosecutrix stated that accused, stealthily removed a gold chain and a watch, but in her statement before court, she deposed that accused snatched the chain and watch - Further while according to the prosecutrix the watch snatched away by the accused was 'Titan' while what was recovered was 'Omex' watch. (vi) Nephew and niece (aged 10 to 17 years) of prosecutrix were present when accused entered the house - They did not support the prosecution in Court. (vii) According to prosecutrix rape was committed forcibly, but there was no injury on the breast or the thighs of the prosecurtix or private parts.
Topic(s)-
Important Decision(s)-
- A sterling witness is one whose version can be accepted by the Court without any corroboration and based on which the guilty can be punished.
- According to prosecutrix rape was committed forcibly, but there was no injury on the breast or the thighs of the prosecurtix or private parts.