Acquittal Upheld: SC Dismisses Appeal Citing Unreliable Testimony and Contradictions in Evidence.

The SC upheld the trial court's acquittal of the accused, rejecting the State of Rajasthan's appeal. The SC agreed with the HC's refusal to grant leave, citing inconsistencies and lack of corroboration in the victim's testimony under Sections 363, 366, 376, and 323 of the IPC. The Court emphasized that the victim's unreliable testimony and contradictions in witness statements made it unsafe to convict solely based on her account. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the acquittal.

---

---

Issues involved:
The judgment involves the refusal of the High Court to grant leave against the judgment of acquittal by the State of Rajasthan, based on the prosecution's case under Section 363, 366, 376, and 323 of the Indian Penal Code against the accused.

Details of the Judgment:

Issue 1: Allegation of Rape and Acquittal
The prosecution was initiated based on a first information report alleging that the victim, Kirti Chauhan, was subjected to sexual intercourse against her consent by the accused. Despite charges under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, the trial court acquitted the accused due to inconsistencies in the victim's testimony, lack of supporting evidence, and contradictions in the statements of witnesses.

Issue 2: Appeal and Refusal of Leave
The State of Rajasthan appealed the acquittal, seeking leave from the High Court. However, the High Court declined to grant leave, stating that the acquittal was based on a proper appreciation of the evidence available on record, leading to the State's further appeal to the Supreme Court.

Issue 3: Legal Position on Sole Testimony of Prosecutrix
The appellant argued that the trial court erred in acquitting the accused solely based on the victim's testimony, emphasizing that conviction can be based on the sole testimony of the prosecutrix if found credible. Citing legal precedent, the appellant contended that no corroboration is required for such testimony.

Judgment and Conclusion
The Supreme Court upheld the trial court's decision, stating that the victim's testimony was unreliable and lacked corroboration. Noting contradictions in her statements and the absence of supporting evidence, the Court found it unsafe to base the conviction solely on her testimony. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the High Court's refusal to grant leave against the judgment of acquittal.

---