Delhi High Court Acquits Arjun in Rape Case, Cites Inconsistencies and Lack of Evidence
Conviction under Section 376 IPC Overturned Due to Prosecution's Failure to Prove Victim's Minority and Consistent Testimony
In a significant judgment, the Delhi High Court has acquitted Arjun, who was previously convicted under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for rape. The court found that the prosecution failed to establish the victim's minority beyond reasonable doubt and noted inconsistencies in the victim's testimony, which had materially improved over time.
The case originated from an incident reported on the night of March 24, 2013, when the victim's mother lodged a complaint about her minor daughter going missing. The victim later returned and provided statements under Sections 161 and 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.), initially not naming Arjun. It was only in her statement under Section 164 that she mentioned physical relations with him, claiming they were consensual.
The pivotal issue in the case was the victim's age. The prosecution relied on a birth certificate to establish her as a minor, which was later found to be forged according to the Office of Registrar (Births & Deaths), MCD. No ossification test was conducted to verify her age, leaving the prosecution's claims unsubstantiated.
Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri, who presided over the appeal, highlighted the discrepancies in the victim's testimonies and the unproven birth certificate as critical shortcomings in the prosecution's case. The court concluded that the victim's testimony did not inspire confidence and lacked the consistency required to uphold a conviction.
The court's judgment emphasized that the entire case's foundation rested on proving the victim's minority, which the prosecution failed to do convincingly. Consequently, the appellant's conviction and sentence were set aside, and Arjun was acquitted.
The decision underscores the importance of consistent and corroborative evidence in cases involving serious allegations such as rape. The court's ruling has been communicated to the Trial Court and the concerned Jail Superintendent, bringing closure to Arjun's legal ordeal.
Bottom Line:
Conviction under Section 376 IPC cannot be sustained if the prosecution fails to establish the victim's minority beyond reasonable doubt, and the testimony of the victim is inconsistent and materially improved during trial.
Statutory provision(s): Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 376, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Sections 161, 164, 363, 428, Evidence Act, 1872
Arjun v. State (NCT of Delhi), (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2779620
