Section 103- Pratap Dolai vs State Of West Bengal
Bench:
Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj.
Facts:
- Pratap Dolai, herein the Appellant, committed rape of a minor girl (herein referred to as the “victim”), when she had gone to the toilet at her school.
- A complaint was lodged at the local police station and the Appellant was arrested. After investigation he was charged under Section 376(2) read with 511 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Issues:
- Whether a plea of alibi be accepted without the accused adducing evidence to support it?
- Whether the burden of proof to prove the alibi lies on the accused?
Contentions of the Appellant:
- The complaint is false and the case was concocted out of political rivalry between the victim’s family and the Appellant.
- It clearly appears from the medical report of the victim that she has not faced penetrative sexual assault, which was also the finding of the District Judge.
- Even though the elder sister of the victim is an eye witness, she has not been examined which proves that the case is a trick to falsely implicate the Appellant.
Contentions of the State:
- The statements of the victim’s family and her statement corroborated by other evidence placed on record, establish that theAppellant assaultedthe victim girl.
- After being medically examined, it appeared that the victim had injuries and swelling around her reproductive parts which, according to the doctor,may be caused if any person tries to insert his penis in the vagina of a girl aged about six years.
- No plea of alibi was taken by the Appellant before the District and Sessions Judge.
Background:
The District and Sessions Judge found the Appellant guilty of commission of the offence punishable under Sections 376 read with Section511 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and directed him to pay a fine of Rs.4,000and a compensation of Rs. 10, 000 to the victim. The Appellant preferred an appeal before the Calcutta High Court against the order and his conviction. The decision of the High Court has been furnished below.
Judgment:
After examining the statements of all prosecution witnesses, the High Court upheld the conviction order of the District and Sessions Judge.
It was also observed that, even though it has been argued by the Appellant that he was not present at the time of the incident, no plea has been raised and no evidence has been furnished by him support his alibi. The burden of proof to prove his plea of alibi lies on the Accused, as per Section 103 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Since, no evidence was adduced by the Appellant to support his plea of alibi, the Appeal was henceforth, dismissed.
