Appellate court overturns conviction citing inconsistencies in evidence and lack of medical corroboration
In a significant judgment, the Allahabad High Court has acquitted three men, Hetram, Shanker, and Bhudat, who were previously convicted of gang rape. The judgment, delivered by Justice Avnish Saxena, sets aside the trial court's decision from 1984, which had sentenced the trio to seven years of rigorous imprisonment.
The appellate court found substantial inconsistencies in the prosecution's evidence, including a delayed First Information Report (FIR), absence of medical corroboration, and discrepancies in witness statements. The case hinged on the testimony of the victim and her husband, who were the key witnesses. However, the court noted that the victim mentioned the involvement of a fourth person, not named in the FIR, which raised doubts about the prosecution's narrative.
The judgment highlighted that the medico-legal report did not support the allegations of gang rape. Conducted five days after the incident, the report revealed no signs of injury or sperm presence, despite claims of a brutal assault. The victim, pregnant at the time, did not exhibit any injuries, which further weakened the prosecution's case.
Justice Saxena emphasized that the appellate court must be cautious but can grant the benefit of doubt and set aside a conviction if the prosecution fails to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The court cited judgments from the Supreme Court, including the case of Lalliram v. State of M.P., which underscores the importance of credible evidence in gang rape allegations.
During the trial, the defense argued that the FIR's delay was unjustifiable and suggested that the charges stemmed from a personal vendetta involving the accused and the informant over a property dispute. The court acknowledged these points, noting the prosecution's failure to provide a plausible explanation for the delayed reporting.
The acquittal comes as a relief to the accused, who have maintained their innocence for over four decades. The case, originally registered in 1983, was marred by procedural lapses and evidentiary issues, which the appellate court found sufficient to overturn the conviction.
This judgment underscores the judiciary's role in ensuring justice, particularly in cases involving severe allegations like gang rape, where the standard of proof must be rigorously met to sustain a conviction.
Bottom line:-
Appellate court granted benefit of doubt to accused in a gang rape case due to inconsistencies in prosecution evidence, delayed FIR, lack of corroborative medical evidence, and discrepancies in witness testimonies.
Statutory provision(s): Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 376, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 374, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 313
Hetram v. State of U.P., (Allahabad) : Law Finder Doc id # 2894331
