In a notable judgment, the High Court of Chhattisgarh clarified that the conviction of the appellant for the offense under Section 506-II of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) could not be sustained solely on the basis of hearsay testimony provided by the victim's father and sister. The Court emphasized that such testimony was insufficient to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
This decision came while partly allowing an appeal filed by the appellant under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the impugned judgment passed by the Special Judge in a Sessions Case under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Brief Facts:
The appellant had abused and threatened the prosecutrix’s nephew and ousted him by entering her house. Thereafter, the appellant raped her. The learned trial Court framed charges against the appellant for the offense under Section 376 and 506-II of the IPC, which was denied by the appellant. After considering the evidence, the learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellant. The appellant has challenged the legality and propriety of the impugned judgment by filing this appeal.
Contentions of the Appellant:
The Learned Counsel for the Appellant submitted that it is not a case of rape, rather, there was a love affair between the appellant and victim/prosecutrix, but after the marriage of the appellant, when he refused to meet her, then only, she falsely implicated appellant in the instant case. He argued that the learned trial court convicted and sentenced the accused/appellant without appreciating evidence available on record.
Contentions of the Respondent:
The Learned Counsel for the Respondent submitted that there is not only eye-witness to the incident, but also the victim/prosecutrix and other witnesses have very well supported the case of prosecution, which also gets support from medical evidence as well as FSL report, therefore, the appeal is liable to be dismissed.
Observations of the court:
The court noted that the manner in which rape was committed by the appellant with the victim/prosecutrix, as he abused and threatened her nephew, tore her frock, and dragged her into another room, where he raped her, it can be supposed that the young girl would have come under fear, as such, she could have surrendered herself. Therefore, not finding any noticeable injury except scratches over the body of the victim/prosecutrix could not be a ground to discard other evidence available on record.
The Court observed that only on the basis of hearsay witnesses, i.e., the father and sister of the victim /prosecutrix, the appellant could not be held guilty for the offense punishable under Section 506-II of the IPC. The learned trial Court held the appellant guilty of the offense under Section 506-II, IPC, only on the basis of hearsay witnesses, which is not legal evidence. The Court said that there is no infirmity or illegality in holding the appellant guilty by the learned trial Court for the offense under Section 376 of the IPC.
The decision of the Court:
The Chhattisgarh High Court, partly allowing the appeal, held that the conviction and sentence of the appellant under Section 506-II of IPC awarded by the trial Court are set aside and he is acquitted of the above offense. However, his conviction under Section 376 of the IPC and the sentence imposed thereunder by the trial Court vide impugned judgment, is affirmed.
Case Title: Lakhan Kewat vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi
Case No.: CRA No. 1279 of 2024
Advocate for the Appellant: Mr. Sanjay Kumar Yadav
Advocate for the Respondent: Ms. Sunita Manikpuri
