Full Name		Full Name is required
Email ID		Email ID required Invalid Email is ID
(this email-id will be treated as your User ID also)
Address
City		City required
Mobile No		Mobile No is required Invalid Mobile No
	* Mobile No is required for verification of identity

Head Note

Indian Penal Code,1860  - Section 376 (2)

Sentence - Award of Lesser Sentence - "Adequate and special reasons" - Incident is 20 years old and the fact that the parties are married and have entered into a compromise, are the adequate and special reasons -Although the conviction of the appellant upheld yet the sentence reduced to the period already undergone by the appellant.

Indian Penal Code,1860  - Section 376

Absence of Injury on Person of Prosecutrix - Testimony of Prosecutrix - Plea on behalf of the appellant that there is no sign of injury on the body of the victim and no definite opinion of rape is given by the PW-3, though there had been grappling for 15-20 minutes between the victim and the accused - Held that thought presence of injury on the body of the victim is not a sine qua non to prove the charge of rape yet the medical examination was done on the same day on which the alleged offence was committed, and going by the medical examination report and the statement of P.W.3 doctor, it is improbable that rape was committed.

Indian Penal Code,1860  - Section 376

Testimony of Prosecutrix - Corroboration - Plea on behalf of the accused-appellant that there is no corroboration and there is contradiction in the prosecution case on important aspects - Held that the Court should not rely solely on the testimony of the prosecutrix as her statement requires corroboration as it has minor contradictions and is not corroborated by other prosecution witnesses - The two maternal uncles (PW-4 and PW-5) of the prosecutrix did not support her and were declared hostile.

Indian Penal Code,1860  - Section 376

Testimony of Prosecutrix - Plea that there is absence of spermatozoa in the vaginal swab of the victim and the Chemical Examination report found that the sample of semen found on the garments of the victim was insufficient to link the same with the accused hence benefit of doubt should be given to the appellant - Held that the Chemical Examiner report found that the sample of semen was not sufficient to link the same to the accused, notwithstanding that absence of spermatozoa on the vaginal smear could not be allowed to tell against the version of the prosecutrix.

Topic(s)-Rape - Testimony of Prosecutrix - Corroboration - Conviction