Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Bar Under Order II Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Invoked Where Specific Performance Was Legally Premature Due To Statutory Impediments: P&H High Court Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Allahabad High Court Acquits Appellant in Rape Case - Unreliable Testimony and Lack of Corroborative Evidence

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant Judgement, the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad acquitted the appellant in a case involving allegations of sexual assault, highlighting the unreliability of the prosecutrix's testimony and the absence of corroborative evidence. The judgment, delivered on July 12, 2023, brings attention to the necessity of substantial evidence for conviction in such cases.

High Court found the testimony of the victim recorded during the trial to be "unbelievable/improbable" and lacking credibility. The court emphasized that "one piece of her testimony cannot be relied upon unless there is some other corroborative evidence." The trial court's decision to convict the appellant solely based on a small portion of the prosecutrix's testimony without corroboration was deemed a "manifest illegality" by the High Court.

High court highlighted the requirement for corroborative evidence: "The law laid down through the aforesaid judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in clear terms, provides that if the testimony of the prosecutrix has been found to be full of contradictions, then the conviction cannot be based on certain piece of testimony of the prosecutrix unless there is corroborative evidence to support the version of the prosecutrix."

The court further noted that the Supreme Court has emphasized the need for the testimony of the prosecutrix to pass the test of a "sterling witness," and that the sole testimony cannot be the basis for conviction if it is under a cloud of suspicion. In this case, the court found material contradictions in the prosecutrix's version of events, and the medical evidence did not support the prosecution's case.

The judgment referred to previous enmity between the families involved and the lack of supporting witnesses. The court concluded that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt, warranting the acquittal of the appellant.

This judgment serves as a reminder of the importance of reliable and trustworthy evidence in cases of sexual assault, highlighting the need for corroboration and consistency in the testimony of the prosecutrix. It establishes a precedent that a conviction cannot be based solely on the uncorroborated testimony of the victim.

The decision of the High Court in this case draws on precedents set by the Supreme Court, specifically the judgments in Baldeo Sao vs. State of Jharkhand (2007) and Santosh Prasad @ Santosh Kumar vs. State of Bihar (2020). These cases underscore the significance of corroborative evidence and the need for the testimony of the prosecutrix to meet the standards of a "sterling witness" for conviction in sexual assault cases.

Date of Decision: July 12, 2023

Devanand Pandey  vs State of U.P.    

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Devanand_Vs_State_12_July_2023_Allah_HC.pdf"]

Latest Legal News