Fri. Apr 23rd, 2021

Sharwan vs State on 19 May, 2017

2 min read

2. Assailing the conviction, learned counsel for the appellant submits that
initially the complaint was of molestation only, however, later on,
allegations of rape were leveled which are clearly afterthought. He further
added that the prosecutrix had herself stated in her deposition in Court that

Page 1 of 9
she resided in a thickly populated area and if anyone raises alarm, it can be
easily heard. Thus, it is highly improbable that despite her shouting to save
nobody came to her rescue. Further, despite identifying the car and its driver,
she stated that she cannot give the number of the car as she was illiterate.
During her cross-examination, she could not state whether Sharwan or
someone else was driving the car. As per the MLC of the prosecutrix, her
version of forcefully taking her and committing rape upon her is not fortified
as there was no external injury. Lastly, it is contended that the appellant has
been falsely implicated in the present case due to dispute over the jhuggi.
Placing reliance on the decision reported as (2012) 7 SCC 171 Narender
Kumar v. State (NCT of Delhi), it is submitted that it is not the duty of the
defence to explain how and why the accused has been falsely implicated,
rather the prosecution case has to stand on its own legs and cannot take
support from the weakness of the defence. Statement of the prosecutrix has
to be read with the other evidence in totality and when the story projected by
the prosecutrix is highly improbable, it should not be believed. Referring to
the decision reported as (2010) 4 SCC 115 Jai Krishna Mandal V. State of
Jharkhand wherein the appellant was falsely implicated due to deep enmity
between the family of the prosecutrix and appellants and there was ample
opportunity for the prosecutrix to raise hue and cry but she did not attempt to
do so and there was no injury on the prosecutrix, learned counsel contends
that the appellant be acquitted.

Source: Indian Kanoon

Leave a Reply