Trademark Pirates Face Legal Wrath: Delhi HC Enforces Radio Mirchi’s IP Rights Swiftly Madras High Court Upholds Extended Adjudication Period Under Customs Act Amid Allegations of Systemic Lapses Disputes Over Religious Office Will Be Consolidated for Efficient Adjudication, Holds Karnataka High Court Motive Alone, Without Corroborative Evidence, Insufficient for Conviction : High Court Acquits Accused in 1993 Murder Case Himachal Pradesh HC Criticizes State for Delays: Orders Timely Action on Employee Grievances Calls for Pragmatic Approach to Desertion and Cruelty in Divorce Cases: Calcutta High Court Orders Fresh Trial Juvenile Tried as Adult: Bombay High Court Validates JJB Decision, Modifies Sentence to 7 Years Retrospective Application of Amended Rules for Redeployment Declared Invalid: Orissa High Court NDPS Act Leaves No Room for Leniency: HC Requires Substantial Proof of Innocence for Bail No Protection Without Performance: MP High Court Denies Relief Under Section 53A of Transfer of Property Act Delays in processing applications for premature release cannot deprive convicts of interim relief: Karnataka High Court Grants 90-Day Parole Listing All Appeals Arising From A Common Judgment Before The Same Bench Avoids Contradictory Rulings: Full Bench of the Patna High Court. Age Claims in Borderline Cases Demand Scrutiny: Madhya Pradesh HC on Juvenile Justice Act Bishop Garden Not Available for Partition Due to Legal Quietus on Declaration Suit: Madras High Court Exclusion of Certain Heirs Alone Does Not Make a Will Suspicious: Kerala High Court Upholds Validity of Will Proof of Delivery Was Never Requested, Nor Was it a Payment Precondition: Delhi High Court Held Courier Firm Entitled to Payment Despite Non-Delivery Allegations Widowed Daughter Eligible for Compassionate Appointment under BSNL Scheme: Allahabad High Court Brutality of an Offence Does Not Dispense With Legal Proof: Supreme Court Overturns Life Imprisonment of Two Accused Marumakkathayam Law | Partition Is An Act By Which The Nature Of The Property Is Changed, Reflecting An Alteration In Ownership: Supreme Court Motor Accident Claim | Compensation Must Aim To Restore, As Far As Possible, What Has Been Irretrievably Lost: Supreme Court Awards Rs. 1.02 Crore Personal Criticism Of Judges Or Recording Findings On Their Conduct In Judgments Must Be Avoided: Supreme Court Efficiency In Arbitral Proceedings Is Integral To Effective Dispute Resolution. Courts Must Ensure That Arbitral Processes Reach Their Logical End: Supreme Court Onus Lies On The Propounder To Remove All Suspicious Circumstances Surrounding A Will To The Satisfaction Of The Court: Calcutta High Court Deeds of Gift Not Governed by Section 22-B of Registration Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court Testimony Of  Injured Witness Carries A Built-In Guarantee Of Truthfulness: Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Conviction for Attempted Murder POCSO | Conviction Cannot Be Sustained Without Conclusive Proof Of Minority - Burden Lies On The Prosecution: Telangana High Court Credible Eyewitness Account, Supported By Forensic Corroboration, Creates An Unassailable Chain Of Proof That Withstands Scrutiny: Punjab and Haryana High Court Jammu & Kashmir High Court Grants Bail to Schizophrenic Mother Accused of Murdering Infant Son

Acquittal U/S 376 IPC | Consent Under Misconception of Fact Not Sustainable Without Medical Evidence: Allahabad High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Allahabad High Court has upheld the acquittal of Madan Yadav, who was charged with rape and other offenses under the IPC and SC/ST Act. The bench, comprising Justices Rahul Chaturvedi and Nand Prabha Shukla, emphasized the importance of medical evidence and noted the consensual nature of the relationship, spanning five years, between the accused and the complainant.

The case revolved around accusations by the complainant that Madan Yadav had engaged in a sexual relationship with her under the false pretext of marriage, starting in 2014. The complainant alleged that Yadav's behavior changed after securing employment and he ultimately refused to marry her, leading to the filing of an FIR in 2019. The trial court had acquitted Yadav of the serious charges, convicting him only under Section 323 IPC.

The High Court highlighted the lack of medical evidence due to the complainant’s refusal to undergo an internal examination. "The absence of a medical examination significantly undermines the credibility of the prosecution's case," noted the bench. Dr. Pallavi Pandey, who initially examined the complainant, testified that the complainant declined further medical testing, raising doubts about the allegations.

The court extensively discussed the nature of the relationship between the accused and the complainant. It was noted that both parties had engaged in a consensual relationship over five years. "The prolonged and voluntary nature of their relationship, spanning multiple years and locations, suggests that the complainant willingly participated in the relationship," the court stated.

The bench analyzed the concept of consent within the context of Section 90 IPC. It found no evidence to suggest that the complainant's consent was obtained through fraud or coercion. The judgment cited relevant Supreme Court rulings, including Maheshwar Tigga vs. State of Jharkhand, to emphasize that consent given over an extended period under voluntary circumstances cannot be retrospectively construed as rape.

"The refusal to submit to a medical examination casts a substantial shadow on the prosecution's claims. The alleged threat to her brother, without any supporting evidence, further diminishes the credibility of the complainant's allegations," the bench observed.

The High Court's decision to uphold the acquittal sends a significant message regarding the evaluation of evidence in sexual offense cases. By emphasizing the lack of medical evidence and the consensual nature of the relationship, the judgment reinforces the need for concrete and corroborative evidence in such cases. This ruling is expected to impact future cases involving similar allegations, highlighting the judiciary's cautious approach in distinguishing between consensual relationships and genuine instances of sexual assault.

 

Date of Decision: 30.05.2024

Informant/Victim vs. State of U.P. and Another

Similar News