In a recent decision, the Supreme Court of India dismissed an appeal filed by the State (GNCT of Delhi) challenging the acquittal of the accused, Vipin @ Lalla, who had been charged with abduction, rape, and criminal intimidation. The appeal was dismissed after the Court found inconsistencies and contradictions in the victim's testimony.
The case originated from a complaint filed by the victim, a 16-year-old girl, who accused the defendant of abducting and raping her on September 16, 2014. However, the proceedings were complicated by significant issues with the victim's statement and the overall evidence presented.
The Trial Court had pointed out that the FIR was lodged two days after the alleged incident, and the delay was not adequately explained. Additionally, the Court observed contradictions in the victim's testimony, particularly regarding how she claimed to have struck the accused. The medical examination, while indicating a torn hymen, failed to definitively corroborate the allegations of forced sexual intercourse.
"The testimony of the prosecutrix in the present case thus has failed to inspire absolute confidence of the Trial Court, the High Court, and this Court as well," the Supreme Court bench, comprising Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra, noted in its ruling.
The Court also questioned the credibility of the victim’s version of events, particularly the claim that she did not raise an alarm when the accused, a person known to her, allegedly abducted her and took her to a nearby shop under the threat of a knife. "It is not believable that when the prosecutrix was caught by the accused who is known to the prosecutrix, she went with him quite a distance in the Bazaar and then to a shop, she never raised any alarm," the bench remarked.
The Supreme Court emphasized that while the testimony of a victim in cases of sexual assault can be crucial, it must be consistent and inspire confidence to form the basis for a conviction. In this case, the Court concluded that the prosecution had not provided sufficient evidence to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt.
"Under these circumstances, we are not inclined to interfere with the well-considered order of the Trial Court and the High Court," the bench concluded, thereby upholding the acquittal of the accused.
Picture Source :