Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

Acquits Appellant in POCSO Case - Discrepancies in Prosecutrix's Testimony: Gauhati High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Gauhati High Court acquitted the appellant, Asuruddin Khan, in a POCSO (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences) case, highlighting discrepancies in the testimony of the prosecutrix. The judgment, delivered by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Parthivjyoti Saikia on 5th June 2023, set aside the appellant's conviction under Section 4 of the POCSO Act and ordered his immediate release.

The case involved allegations of sexual offense against a minor. According to the prosecution, the prosecutrix, a 14-year-old girl, had been summoned by Saheda Khatun to her house on 14th August 2016. It was alleged that the appellant had sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix on the promise of marriage. The prosecutrix lodged an FIR, and during the trial, she provided a statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).

However, during the trial, discrepancies emerged in the prosecutrix's versions of the incident. The statement given under Section 164 CrPC indicated consensual intercourse, whereas her trial testimony suggested forceful intercourse with threats. The court noted these inconsistencies and observed that the evidence of the prosecutrix failed to inspire confidence. The court also took into account the father's statement regarding the appellant's refusal to recognize the prosecutrix when she called him after the incident.

After evaluating the evidence, the High Court concluded that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant had committed the offense with a criminal intention. The court opined that the prosecutrix seemed to be a consenting party to the act of the appellant and embellished her evidence to ensure his punishment.

In the judgment, the court held, "The evidence of the prosecutrix failed to inspire confidence. The prosecution evidence failed to prove the offense against the appellant beyond all reasonable doubt." Accordingly, the appeal was allowed, the conviction was set aside, and the appellant was acquitted. If the appellant was in custody, the court ordered for his immediate release.

This judgment raises important considerations regarding the evaluation of evidence in POCSO cases and the need for consistency and reliability in witness testimony. The court's decision highlights the importance of ensuring that evidence meets the threshold of proof beyond reasonable doubt before convicting an accused.

The judgment serves as a reminder that while protecting the rights of victims is crucial, the principles of justice and fairness must also be upheld. The acquittal of the appellant in this case emphasizes the necessity for a meticulous examination of evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt in criminal cases.

Date of Decision: 5th June 2023.

ASURUDDIN KHAN vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR

Latest Legal News