Sat. Sep 26th, 2020

False allegation of committing rape causes humiliation and damage to the accused

2 min read

Delhi High Court: While dealing with a case where seven persons were
falsely implicated for committing rape on the prosecutrix by threatening her
that they will kill her brother and display the photograph (in which she was
being raped) in front of her house, a division bench on G.S. Sistani and S.D.
Sehgal JJ.  held that no doubt the rape
cases cause great distress and humiliation to the victims of rape, but at the
same time false allegation of committing rape also causes humiliation and
damage to the accused, as the accused also has right which has to be protected
and the possibility of false implication has to be ruled out.

Vikas Pahwa, the Counsel for the
appellant contended that the prosecutorix had an affair with the appellant
since long time, and when the appellant refused to accept the marriage proposal
of the prosecutorix, she falsely implicated the appellant in the rape case. The
Counsel further contended that it is dangerous to punish the accused of rape
solely on the basis of oral evidence of the prosecutorix. Per Contra, Firoz
Khan Ghazi, the Counsel for the State favoured the conviction of the accused
and argued that the prosecution has proved their case beyond any shadows of
doubt.

The Court stated that it is a settled
principle of law that conviction can be based on the sole testimony of the
victim of sexual assault without corroboration of any other evidence, if the
testimony inspires confidence and has complete link of truth. However, in the
instant case, the Court observed that the 
prosecutorix confronted with her statements recorded under S. 161 and
164 of CrPC on several issues/ facts contrary to the deposition in Court, and
noted that “large number of contradictions, improvements and exaggerations in
her statement cast shadow of doubt to rely upon her version”. The Court further
noted that the prosecutorix failed the test of being a sterling witness, whose
statement can be relied on face value without any hesitation, as her statement
neither stood corroborated from medical evidence or any other material on record,
and thus the prosecution failed to discharge its onus to prove the rape on the
prosecutrix. The Court concluded that the trial court erroneously appreciated
the evidence, as the photograph, identity of persons in the photograph and the
genuineness of the negative has not been proved. Accordingly, the Court setaside
the order passed by the trial court which convicted and sentenced the
appellants (accused) for the offences punishable under S. 376(2)(g) /342/
506(II) read with S. 34 of the Penal Code, and acquitted them of the charges
framed against them. [Rohit Bansal v.
State, 2015 SCC OnLine Del
9937, decided on 29.05.2015]
Source: Legal news India

Leave a Reply