MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

"Prosecutrix Eloped with Intent to Marry": Delhi High Court Upholds Acquittal in Controversial Rape Case

05 September 2024 5:22 AM

By: Admin


The High Court of Delhi today upheld the acquittal accused and another respondent in a highly scrutinized rape case. The State had appealed the acquittal verdict, claiming that the trial court's judgment was based on "presumptions and surmises."

"In our considered opinion, the prosecutrix had eloped from her parents' house with their money and jewellery with intent to marry respondent No.1-accused," observed Hon'ble Mr. Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Hon'ble Ms. Justice Neena Bansal Krishna. The judgment elaborates that the prosecutrix and the respondent were, in fact, married and had a child out of the wedlock.

The case was initially filed in 2008 at the Shahbad police station in Delhi, accusing Mahadev and another respondent of multiple charges including kidnapping, rape, and illegal confinement. The prosecutrix, who was studying in class VII at the time of the alleged incidents, had claimed that Mahadev proposed friendship to her and later kidnapped and raped her on multiple occasions.

Casting doubt on the credibility of the prosecutrix, the Court noted material contradictions in her statements. "There are material contradictions in the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Sections 164 Cr.P.C. & 161 Cr.P.C. as well as her statement made before the Court," the judgment states. The Court also pointed to the prosecutrix's intent to separate from her husband as a possible motive behind the allegations.

Representing the State, Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Tarang Srivastava argued that the victim was underage at the time and that the lower court had not adequately considered the evidence. Conversely, the defense counsel contended that the acquittal was justified based on witness testimony and available evidence.

With today's judgment, the High Court has effectively put an end to a lengthy and highly publicized trial, emphasizing the need for courts to critically examine all evidence and testimony before making judgments in sensitive cases such as this one.

 Date of Decision: September 12, 2023

STATE (NCT OF DELHI) vs MAHADEV @ SHARAD & ANR.       

Latest Legal News