Telangana High Court slams prosecution for ‘miserable failure’, acquits man convicted of rape, criminal intimidation

Khan was originally convicted by the V Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge (Mahila Court) at Hyderabad on June 17, 2013. The prosecution’s case stemmed from a complaint filed by the victim on April 3, 2009, alleging that the accused, with whom she had been in love for four years, entered her house on November 21, 2008, and forcibly had sexual intercourse with her by threatening her. The appeal was filed against this 2013 conviction.

The counsel for the appellant pointed out that a complaint was filed with the police over four months after the said incident and added that their relationship was consensual. He also argued that PW1 (victim) in her evidence specifically stated that she lodged the complaint against accused No.1 solely to “pressurise” him to marry her.

Justice Rao’s judgment highlighted several critical failings in the prosecution’s case and contradictions in the victim’s testimony. The High Court pointed out that the trial court had acquitted the accused on the cheating charge (Section 417 IPC), finding that a false promise of marriage was not proved, yet convicted him of rape (Section 376 IPC) using the same evidence.

The court found it “unsafe to rest a conviction solely on PW.1’s testimony in the absence of corroborative medical or other evidence”. The medical evidence was inconsistent with a forced sexual encounter. The doctor (PW.6) who examined the victim “opined that there was no evidence of recent sexual intercourse.”. The judge noted that the victim introduced a crucial detail that the accused had allegedly forced a tablet into her mouth for the first time during the trial. The court concluded this version was an “afterthought.”.

Citing the Supreme Court’s caution in cases where the testimony of the prosecutrix does not inspire confidence or is riddled with inconsistencies, the court must look for corroboration, Justice Rao stated: “the testimony of PW.1 does not inspire such implicit confidence.”

In his concluding remarks, Justice Rao declared that the conviction by the Mahila Court was “liable to be set aside”.

From the homepage

Bihar elections: BJP sees changes as counter to anti-incumbency, but has few easy choices

Wintrack, importer of personal massagers, quits India citing harassment and corruption at Chennai Customs; Finance Ministry orders inquiry

How will the US government shutdown impact immigrants and visa holders?