Delay in reporting rape makes case doubtful 8212; SC

NEW DELHI, JULY 20: The Supreme Court has acquitted two teachers, convicted for raping their colleague, saying the victim did not tell her...

NEW DELHI, JULY 20: The Supreme Court has acquitted two teachers, convicted for raping their colleague, saying the victim did not tell her parents about it for three days and delayed lodging of FIR for ten days making the case doubtful.

The trial court had convicted the two teachers for raping their colleague in the school at Bengaon in Maharashtra on July 9, 1994, relying on medical report and statements of two child witnesses.

Five months later, the victim committed suicide having failed to withstand the humiliation. The prosecution brought charges of 306 abetment to commit suicide and the trial court also convicted the two teachers on this count.

The Bombay High Court upheld the trial court order. Not satisfied with the finding of the two courts, the teachers moved the Supreme Court.

A bench comprising Justice G B Pattanaik, Justice R P Sethi and Justice Shivaraj V Patil said: quot;As the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the appellants beyond reasonable doubt, they are entitled to acquittal.quot;

The statement of the victim to the police, 11 days after she was allegedly subjected to rape, did not indicate her intention to commit suicide, the court said.

quot;The circumstances stated in her statement to police do not suggest that a person making such a statement would, under the normal circumstances, commit suicide after more than five and half months,quot; Justice Sethi said writing the judgement for the bench.

Story continues below this ad

Justice Sethi said if the statement of the victim was not treated as dying declaration, there was no cogent and reliable evidence which could connect the accused with the Commission of the crime.

The court took note of delay in lodging the FIR, medical examination of the victim, non-examination of material witnesses and turning hostile of witnesses including the two child witnesses.

quot;It has also to be kept in mind that after the rape took place on July 9, 1994, the prosecutrix victim is shown to have attended the school on July 10 and 11 as well. Her mother in cross-examination also stated that her daughter had told her about the incident only on July 12,quot; Justice Sethi said.

Victim8217;s father deposed before the court that she did not tell him either on July 17, 18 or 19 that she wanted to file a complaint and in turn he did not disclose before police on July 20, 1994, that she wanted to file criminal complaint.

Story continues below this ad

The bench said: quot;We are, therefore, of the opinion that prosecution has failed to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that the appellants had committed forcible sexual intercourse with the victim on July 9 under the circumstances as narrated in her statement and relied upon by the courts below.

quot;The appellants cannot be convicted and sentenced merely on suspicion,quot; it added.