LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Rajan Salvi (Lawyer)     10 December 2009

Rape of minor - approximate DOB - Acquittal

 

                                                                     REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA             
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2308 OF 2009
        [Arising out of SLP (Criminal) No. 5779 of 2009]
Sunil                                      .. Appellant
                            Versus
State of Haryana                           .. Respondent
                       JUDGMENT
Dalveer Bhandari, J.
[The last paragraphs]
The short question in the facts and circumstances of this   case   remains    to    be    determined    is   whether   the prosecutrix was a minor? Dr. Sadhna Verma, PW1 who examined the prosecutrix referred her for verification to the Dental Surgeon and the Radiologist. The failure of getting the prosecutrix examined from the Dental Surgeon or the Radiologist despite the fact that she was referred to them by Dr. Sadhna Verma, PW1 is a serious flaw in the prosecution version. We are not laying down as a rule that all these tests must be performed in all cases, but in the instant case, in absence of primary evidence, reports of the Dental Surgeon and the Radiologist would have helped us in arriving at the conclusion regarding the age of the prosecutrix.
30.    The prosecution also failed to produce any Admission Form of the school which would have been primary evidence regarding the age of the prosecutrix.     
31.     The   School   Leaving   Certificate   produced   by the prosecution was also procured on 12.9.1996, six days after the incident and three days after the arrest of the appellant. As per that certificate also, she joined the school in the middle of the session and left the school in the middle of the session. The attendance in the school of 100 days is also not reliable.
 
 
32.     The prosecutrix was admitted in the school by Ashok Kumar, her brother. The said Ashok Kumar was not examined. The alleged School Leaving Certificate on the basis of which the age was entered in the school was not produced.
33.     Bishan, PW8, the father of the prosecutrix has also not been able to give correct date of birth of the prosecutrix. In his statement he clearly stated that he is giving an approximate date without any basis or record. In a criminal case, the conviction of the appellant cannot be based on an approximate date which is not supported by any record. It would be quite unsafe to base conviction on an approximate date.
34.   On consideration of the totality of the facts and circumstances of this case, it would be unsafe to convict the appellant when there are so many infirmities, holes and lacunas in the prosecution version. The appellant is clearly entitled to benefit of doubt and consequently the appeal filed by the appellant deserves to be allowed. The appellant is directed to be released forthwith, if not required in any case.
The appeal is accordingly disposed of.
                                         ..............................J.
                                         (Dalveer Bhandari)                                         ..............................J.
                                         (A. K. Patnaik)
New Delhi;
December 4, 2009.


Learning

 1 Replies

N.K.Assumi (Advocate)     10 December 2009

Rajan, thank you for the citation.


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register