Punjab and Haryana High Court Quashes State Election Commission's Cancellation of Panchayat Elections in Punjab J&K High Court Quashes FIR Against Bajaj Allianz, Asserts Insurance Dispute Shouldn’t Be Criminalized Sole Eyewitness's Testimony Insufficient to Sustain Murder Conviction: Madras High Court Acquits Three Accused in Murder Case Presumption of Innocence is Strengthened in Acquittal Cases; Appellate Courts Must Respect Trial Court Findings Unless Clearly Perverse: Delhi High Court NDPS | Physical or Virtual Presence of Accused is Mandatory for Extension of Detention Beyond 180 Days: Andhra Pradesh HC Bombay High Court Quashes Suspension of Welfare Benefits for Construction Workers Due to Model Code of Conduct Section 131 of Electricity Act Does Not Mandate Finalized Transfer Scheme Before Bidding: Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Privatization of UT Chandigarh Electricity Department Revenue Authorities Must Safeguard State Property, Not Indulge in Land Scams: Madhya Pradesh High Court Proposed Amendment Clarifies, Not Changes, Cause of Action: High Court of Jharkhand emphasizing the necessity of amendment for determining real questions in controversy. EWS Candidates Selected on Merit Should Not Be Counted Towards Reserved Quota: P&H High Court Finance Act 2022 Amendments Upheld: Supreme Court Validates Retrospective Customs Authority for DRI Mere Breach Of Contract Does Not Constitute A Criminal Offense Unless Fraudulent Intent Exists From The Start: Delhi High Court Anticipatory Bail Not Intended As A Shield To Avoid Lawful Proceedings In Cases Of Serious Crimes: Allahabad High Court Rajasthan High Court Grants Bail in Light of Prolonged Detention and Delays in Trial U/S 480 BNSS Provision Bombay High Court Orders Disclosure of Candidates' Marks in Public Recruitment Process: Promotes Transparency under RTI Act Maintenance | Father's Duty to Support Daughters Until Self-Sufficiency or Marriage: Karnataka High Court Designation of Arbitration 'Venue' as 'Seat' Confers Exclusive Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Rules in Dubai Arbitration Case Corporate Veil Shields Company Assets from Partition as Joint Family Property: Madras High Court Principal Employers Liable for ESI Contributions for Contract Workers, But Assessments Must Be Fair and Account for Eligibility: Kerala High Court Government Entities Must be Treated Equally to Private Parties in Arbitration Proceedings: Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Resumption of Disciplinary Inquiry Against Storekeeper in Ration Misappropriation Case

No Incriminating Word Whispered by Prosecutrix and Her Parents; Investigation Not Up to the Mark: Delhi High Court Acquits in Gang-Rape Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Delhi acquitted four individuals of gang-rape charges, underscoring the lack of incriminating evidence and weaknesses in the investigation process.

Legal Point: The appeal in the case centered around convictions under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including Sections 328, 366, 342, 34, and 376D, dealing with kidnapping, unconsciousness-inducing, and gang-rape. The appellants challenged the trial court’s decision, primarily on grounds of insufficient evidence, inconsistent testimony of the prosecutrix, and gaps in the investigation process.

Facts and Issues: The case stemmed from an incident reported on 29th July 2018 involving the alleged kidnapping and gang-rape of 'G'. However, the statements made by 'G' under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. and her testimony during the trial presented inconsistencies. Furthermore, the investigation faced criticism for not collecting vital evidence such as the Call Detail Records (CDR) of 'G' and discrepancies in handling key evidence.

Testimony Analysis: 'G' disowned her initial complaint, claiming it was made under family influence. Neither her testimony nor her parents' statements corroborated the prosecution's narrative.

Investigation Lapses: The court noted significant lapses in the investigation, including the failure to collect CDRs and issues in the handling of evidence, casting doubt on the prosecution's case.

DNA Evidence and Physical Examination: The DNA report's relevance was questioned due to procedural gaps. Furthermore, no physical evidence suggestive of a non-consensual act was found.

Legal Reasoning: The court emphasized that even if the DNA matched, it could not automatically imply a non-consensual act, especially when the prosecutrix was a major and did not assert any allegations of assault.

Court Decision: The High Court of Delhi allowed the appeal due to the insufficiency of evidence and unreliable testimonies. The accused were acquitted of all charges, with a direction that their bail bonds shall remain valid for six months as per Section 437A Cr.P.C.

Date of Decision: April 1, 2024

Pawan Sharma and Ors Vs State Govt of NCT of Delhi

 

Similar News