TESTIMONY OF PROSECUTRIX MUST "INSPIRE CONFIDENCE": SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS ACQUITTAL IN RAPE CASE

Supreme Court dismissed the appeal filed by the State (GNCT of Delhi) challenging the acquittal of Vipin @ Lalla in a case involving allegations of kidnapping, rape, criminal intimidation, and sexual assault under Sections 363, 366, 376, 342, and 506 of the IPC, and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act). The Court upheld the decisions of the Trial Court and High Court, reiterating that while a conviction can be based on the sole testimony of the prosecutrix, such testimony must be credible and inspire confidence.

The case involved allegations that the respondent had abducted the prosecutrix, a 16-year-old girl, at knifepoint, taken her to a grocery shop, and raped her. The incident allegedly occurred on September 16, 2014, but the FIR was filed two days later on September 18, 2014. The initial report filed by the prosecutrix’s father mentioned an assault by three boys but made no reference to rape or kidnapping. The prosecutrix later alleged rape and testified against the respondent.

The Trial Court acquitted the respondent, citing contradictions in the prosecutrix’s statements, unexplained delay in filing the FIR, and the lack of corroborative evidence. The High Court upheld the acquittal, leading the State to approach the Supreme Court.

The Court upheld the acquittal, noting several inconsistencies in the prosecution's case and emphasizing that the testimony of the prosecutrix lacked the credibility required for a conviction.

The delay in filing the FIR remained unexplained, weakening the prosecution’s case. The Court observed that the prosecutrix’s initial statements to the police contradicted her testimony in court. Her claims of hitting the accused with a stick also varied—first stating that she hit him on the head, then later saying she hit him on the foot. The accused, upon surrendering, showed no injuries, further raising doubts about her version of events.

The Court highlighted that the prosecutrix did not raise an alarm when allegedly abducted through a public bazaar. Her explanation, that the accused threatened her with a knife, failed to convince the Court.

The Court reaffirmed that a conviction in a rape case can rest solely on the testimony of the prosecutrix if it is credible, consistent, and corroborated by the circumstances. However, in this case, the prosecutrix’s testimony was riddled with contradictions and lacked support from other evidence, including medical findings. While the medical report noted a torn hymen, it found no external injuries, which further undermined claims of force or violence.

The Court emphasized that while the testimony of the prosecutrix holds significant weight, it must inspire confidence and be free from inconsistencies. The absence of such credibility in this case led to the upholding of the acquittal.

The Supreme Court dismissed the State’s appeal and upheld the acquittal of the respondent. It reiterated the importance of evaluating the testimony of the prosecutrix with utmost care, especially when it forms the sole basis of the prosecution’s case.

"The testimony of the prosecutrix does not inspire confidence, and there is insufficient evidence to convict the accused. We find no reason to interfere with the well-considered orders of the Trial Court and High Court."

Date of Decision: January 7, 2025