The Supreme Court ruled that once the Court believes the version of prosecutrix, that is sufficient to establish the offence punishable under Section 376 of IPC.
The appellant has taken an exception to the two concurrent judgments of Sessions Court as well as High Court by which he has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 376 and 450 of Indian Penal Code.
Counsel appearing for the appellant contended that it was a consensual act as can be seen from the evidence on record.
He submitted that there are significant contradictions and omissions in the deposition of the prosecutrix. Also the clothes and undergarments of the prosecutrix as well as the accused which were seized by the police were not sent for analysis to FSL.
The division bench of Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice Abhay S. Oka observed that the evidence of prosecutrix is consistent with the statements made in the First Information Report. Moreover, the contradictions sought to be brought on record in the evidence of the prosecutrix are of insignificant nature which do not affect the substratum of the case of the prosecution.
The bench noted that not even a suggestion has been given to the prosecutrix that there was a consent by the prosecutrix. The evidence on record also shows that the prosecutrix suffered two injuries below the nostril. The pieces of broken bangles were found at the place of the incident.
It was viewed by the court that there is absolutely nothing to discredit the version of the prosecutrix. The Trial Court has gone into the issue of contradictions and omissions in the evidence of the prosecutrix and has believed her testimony for the reasons recorded. Even the High Court has believed the testimony of the prosecutrix.
The court dismissed the appeal.
Case title: Somai v/s State of M.P. (Now Chattisgarh)
Citation: Criminal appeal no. 497/2022