Appellate Court Must Re-Appreciate Evidence To Determine Lesser Offence Under Section 386 CrPC If Graver Charge Is Not Sustained: Supreme Court SARFAESI Act | Provisions Override Other Laws Including Principles Of Res Judicata: Supreme Court Right To Information Act | CCTV Footage Cannot Be Provided Directly To Applicant If It Falls Under Section 8(1)(g) Exemptions: Allahabad High Court Section 24 CPC | Convenience Of Wife Is The Paramount Consideration In Transfer Of Matrimonial Proceedings: Andhra Pradesh High Court Inefficient Case Management By State Law Officers Impedes Justice: Allahabad High Court Directs Principal Secretary (Law) To Reform Procedures Section 24 CPC | Convenience Of Wife Is A Primary Consideration For Transfer Of Matrimonial Proceedings, But Virtual Appearance Can Mitigate Hardship: Andhra Pradesh High Court Son Cannot Claim Co-Ownership Or Resist Eviction Based On Alleged Financial Contribution To Property Purchased In Mother’s Name: Delhi High Court Order 33 Rule 1 CPC | Applicant Must Prove Inability To Pay Court Fee With Cogent Evidence; Mere Assertion Of Indigence Is Insufficient: Chhattisgarh High Court Plaintiff Must Establish Independent Right To Possession, Cannot Rely Solely On Lacunae In Defendant’s Evidence: Delhi High Court Successor Cannot Remain Silent: Bombay High Court Upholds Tenant's Right To Purchase Agricultural Land, Rules Rejection Before 1961 Amendment No Bar Single Mother Has Right To Determine Child’s Surname And Alter Biological Father's Name In Birth Certificate: Calcutta High Court Court Can Sanction Professional Fees Of Valuers Exceeding Prescribed Ceiling Post-Assignment: Bombay High Court MACT | Appellate Court Can Reduce Compensation Even If Insurer’s Appeal Challenges Quantum While Claimant Seeks Enhancement: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order VI Rule 17 CPC | Amendment Of Written Statement To Correct Internal Inconsistencies Does Not Amount To Withdrawal Of Admission: Delhi High Court Oral Family Partition Valid Even If Unregistered: Jharkhand High Court Power Of Attorney Lacking Explicit Interest Is Revocable Regardless Of 'Irrevocable' Label: Gujarat High Court DRC Act | Summary Eviction Proceedings Cannot Be Converted Into Extended Litigation By Seeking To File Additional Documents Post-Pleadings: Delhi High Court Financial Institutions Cannot Use 'Goonda-ism' For Repossession: Supreme Court Mandates Compensation For Violation Of Article 21 Motor Vehicles Act: Claimant Cannot Invoke Jurisdiction Of A Forum Where Neither Accident Occurred Nor Defendant Resides: Supreme Court Article 226 | Writ Court Cannot Decide Title Disputes Or Protect Possession If Factual Matrix Is Disputed: Supreme Court Suppression Of Material Facts In Writ Petition Under Article 32 Renders Challenge Non-Maintainable: Supreme Court

Consensual Nature of Relationship and Lack of Evidence of Forcible Intercourse Leads to Acquittal in Rape Case: Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court acquitted Pankaj Singh, the appellant in a case involving allegations of rape, wrongful confinement, and destruction of evidence. The Bench of Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan observed, “the evidence of the prosecutrix does not inspire confidence due to the consensual nature of the relationship and lack of evidence of forcible intercourse,” leading to the overturning of the conviction previously affirmed by the High Court.

The case centered around the credibility of the prosecutrix’s testimony and the application of legal provisions like Section 114A of the Indian Evidence Act. The key legal point was whether the evidence presented constituted rape or indicated a consensual relationship.

The appellant, Pankaj Singh, was convicted by the Trial Court under Sections 342, 376, and 201 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), with the High Court affirming this conviction. The prosecutrix alleged that Singh, a friend of her husband’s brother, had forcibly raped her and taken objectionable photographs, using them to threaten her. The defense argued the relationship was consensual, highlighted by mutual travel and continuous communication.

Consent in Rape Allegations: The court observed the continuous and consensual communication between the appellant and the prosecutrix, noting the absence of injuries or resistance typically indicative of a non-consensual act.

Section 114A of Evidence Act: The Bench clarified that Section 114A, which presumes absence of consent in rape prosecutions, was inapplicable as Singh wasn’t charged under the specific clause of IPC required for the presumption to operate.

Admissibility of WhatsApp Conversations: The court addressed the admissibility of these conversations, despite the lack of a Section 65B certificate. It found that the evidence did not conclusively prove non-consent.

Absence of Compulsion Evidence: The judgment highlighted that the prosecutrix did not demonstrate any compulsion or resistance, which weakened the prosecution’s case.

Decision: The Supreme Court acquitted Pankaj Singh of all charges due to insufficient evidence of non-consensual intercourse. The Court set aside the lower courts’ convictions, cancelled Singh’s bail bond, and disposed of pending applications.

Date of Decision: March 21, 2024

Pankaj Singh vs. The State of Haryana

 

Latest Legal News