Prosecution Fails to Prove Guilt Beyond Reasonable Doubt Due to Inconsistencies and Lack of Evidence
In a significant judgment, the Rajasthan High Court has acquitted Lajendra Singh @ Lali, who was previously convicted of charges under Sections 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 5(L)/6 of the POCSO Act, 2012, and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The double bench, comprising Justices Vinit Kumar Mathur and Chandra Shekhar Sharma, ruled in favor of the appellant, citing the prosecution's failure to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The case involved allegations of aggravated sexual assault against a minor, where the prosecution accused Lajendra Singh of multiple counts of rape and caste-based atrocities. However, the High Court's decision highlighted several critical flaws in the prosecution's case, including inconsistencies in evidence, lack of corroboration, and investigative deficiencies.
The judgment noted the failure of the prosecution to conclusively establish the victim's minority, a key element in charges under the POCSO Act. Despite reliance on a Secondary Board mark-sheet to prove age, the court pointed out that crucial documents, such as school admission records, were withheld, leading to adverse inferences against the prosecution.
Furthermore, the court found the narrative of inducement under the pretext of passport formalities unconvincing, with the victim's family admitting unfamiliarity with the accused's daughter, who was alleged to reside abroad. The delay in lodging the FIR and the absence of independent corroborative evidence, such as CCTV footage or witness testimonies from the hotel or passport office, further weakened the prosecution's case.
The defense successfully raised reasonable doubt regarding the appellant's involvement, presenting credible evidence of an alternative narrative. Witnesses testified to the appellant's presence at a different hotel with his brother during the alleged incidents, supported by documentary proof.
Ultimately, the court concluded that the prosecution's case was riddled with inconsistencies and failed to meet the high threshold of proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The acquittal underscores the importance of thorough and complete investigation and evidence in criminal proceedings, reaffirming the principle that conviction cannot rest on suspicion or conjecture.
Bottom Line:
Appellant acquitted of charges under Sections 376(2)(n) IPC, Sections 5(L)/6 of POCSO Act, 2012, and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 due to failure of prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, including inconsistencies in evidence, lack of corroboration, and investigative deficiencies.
Statutory provision(s): 376(2)(n) IPC, 5(L)/6 POCSO Act, 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act, 437A CrPC
Lajendra Singh @ Lali v. State, (Rajasthan)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2849376
