TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Supreme Court Affirms Conviction for Attempted Rape, Emphasizes Prosecutrix's Testimony</h1> <h3>Madan Lal Versus State of J&K</h3> The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision to convict the appellant under Section 376 read with 511 IPC for 'attempt to commit rape,' reversing ... - Issues Involved:1. Justification of High Court's interference with the order of acquittal.2. Reliability of the prosecutrix's evidence.3. Corroboration of the prosecutrix's version by other circumstances.Detailed Analysis:1. Justification of High Court's Interference with the Order of Acquittal:The High Court reversed the acquittal by the Sessions Judge, convicting the appellant under Section 376 read with 511 IPC. The High Court found that the Sessions Judge's approach lacked objectivity and failed to appreciate evidence correctly. The High Court emphasized that the charge was for 'attempt to commit rape' and not for 'rape,' which the Sessions Judge overlooked. The High Court noted that the prosecutrix's immediate narration of the incident to her mother, the presence of semen on her salwar, and the absence of both the prosecutrix and the accused from school corroborated the prosecutrix's statement. The High Court also criticized the Sessions Judge for giving undue importance to minor discrepancies and misappreciating the medical evidence. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's reasoning, stating that the appellate court can review evidence and interfere with an acquittal if the trial court's view is unreasonable or based on conjectures.2. Reliability of the Prosecutrix's Evidence:The prosecutrix's evidence was scrutinized in detail. Despite minor inconsistencies, her testimony was found to be cogent and credible. The prosecutrix detailed the incident, stating that the accused forcibly laid her on a blanket, opened her salwar, and attempted to penetrate her, ultimately ejaculating on her thighs. The medical evidence, which found no marks of violence or rupture of the hymen, did not contradict the prosecutrix's account of an 'attempt to commit rape.' The Supreme Court agreed with the High Court that the prosecutrix's evidence was reliable and did not require corroboration, although corroborative evidence was present.3. Corroboration of the Prosecutrix's Version by Other Circumstances:Several circumstances corroborated the prosecutrix's version. Classmates testified that the prosecutrix and the accused were absent from school after 9 a.m. on the day of the incident. The prosecutrix's salwar, seized and analyzed, was found to contain semen, supporting her account of the assault. The prosecutrix's immediate report to her mother and the subsequent filing of the FIR further corroborated her story. The High Court and the Supreme Court found these corroborative pieces of evidence sufficient to support the prosecutrix's testimony and establish the charge of 'attempt to commit rape.'Conclusion:The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision to convict the appellant, finding the prosecutrix's evidence reliable and corroborated by other circumstances. The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was directed to surrender for serving the remaining sentence.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
