Languished In Jail For More Than 9 Yrs In Case Where There’s No Evidence: Allahabad High Court Acquits 45-Yr-Old Man Accused Of Raping Minor Cousin

The Allahabad High Court has acquitted a 45-year-old man who was accused of raping his minor cousin in the year 2016.

The Lucknow Bench was deciding a Jail Appeal filed by the accused under Section 383 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC), challenging the Judgment of the Special Judge.

A Single Bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi observed, “As the appellant used to reside alone in his house and he has been lodged in jail and although he had sought protection of his property by the court, it appears that no action was taken in this regard. The appellant has been made to languish in jail for more than nine years in a case in which there is no evidence to prove his guilt.”

The Bench remarked that the Courts cannot shut their eyes to the ground realities apparent from the fact that now a days it has become very common to level allegation of commission of serious and heinous offences, including offence of rape or sexual abuse of a child by the family members, in petty disputes or in order to grab property.

Amicus Curiae Rehan Ahmad Siddiqui appeared for the Appellant/Accused while Additional Government Advocate (AGA) Mohd. Asif Khan appeared for the Respondent/State.

Brief Facts

An FIR was lodged alleging that at about 9:30 p.m. in March 2016, when the informant had gone to attend the call of nature in the latrine constructed near her house, the Appellant-accused caught hold of her with evil intention, locked her inside his room and raped her. It was alleged that the accused threatened her that in case she told about the incident to her parents, he would kill her. It was further alleged that the door of the room was opened with the intervention of the family members of the informant and some neighbours and thereafter, she could come out of the house after about six hours. A case was registered for the offences under Sections 376, 342, and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Sections 3 and 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act).

The accused filed an Application for his release on bail but the same was rejected by the Trial Court. As per the medico-legal examination report, there was no evidence of recent sexual penetration. However, the Trial Court was of the view that when the victim and other witnesses had stated that the accused had raped her, those statements have to be given precedence over the medical report. It said that an accused cannot be acquitted merely on the ground of some defects in investigation. The accused was convicted and sentenced to undergo 20 years of rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of Rs. 10,000/-. Being aggrieved, he was before the High Court.

Reasoning

The High Court in view of the above facts, noted, “No reasonable person of ordinary prudence would believe that a person aged 45 years kept on shutting the mouth of his minor cousin with one hand and holding her hands with his other hand, continuously for 5-6 hours, he raped her thrice, thereafter he put her upon a loft, even after the victim was put on the loft, she did not raise her voice till her family members recovered her from the loft.”

The Court said that the finding recorded in the medico-legal examination report that there was no evidence of recent sexual penetration, cannot be brushed aside.

“Moreover, even if the aforesaid observation is merely an expert opinion, the finding that the pathological examination of the vaginal smear slide showed absence of spermatozoa and gonococci, is not an opinion and it is a finding recorded upon a scientific test”, it added.

The Court further observed that the discrepancies relating to the description of the offence are not minor discrepancies and these raise a serious doubt against correctness of the allegations levelled in the statements.

“Although, it is correct that minor discrepancies in the statements of the witnesses are natural to occur and these should not lead to acquittal of an accused person, it is equally true that the prosecution has to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and when there are serious discrepancies regarding important and crucial facts relating to the incident, the same would render the statements of the witnesses untrustworthy”, it emphasised.

The Court was of the opinion that the accused has been falsely implicated by the informant and the police in this case and that the evidence on record does not prove that he had raped the victim who is his cousin.

“The trial court has convicted the appellant without proper appreciation of evidence on record and without giving due weight to the medico-legal examination report and the pathological examination report of the victim. The findings of guilt recorded by the trial court are unsustainable in the eyes of law”, it also said.

Conclusion

Moreover, the Court remarked that it is very disturbing that a 45 years old person who had nobody to look after his interest was taken into custody on the allegation of committing rape of his minor cousin.

“His bail application was rejected by the trial Court. Nobody came forward to do pairavi of his case on his behalf. He gave an application to the learned trial court requesting for protection of his family and property but it appears that no action was taken on this application”, it added.

The Court took note of the fact that in one page Jail Appeal written in the handwriting of the accused, he stated that there is nobody to look after his interest and he is a poor person.

“It has come to light during evidence that the appellant used to reside alone. In these circumstances, there is a reasonable apprehension that the property of the appellant might have been taken possession of by the persons from the informant’s side or by any other person”, it concluded.

Accordingly, the High Court allowed the Appeal and acquitted the accused.

Cause Title- Ram Sanehi v. State of U.P. (Neutral Citation: 2025:AHC-LKO:39542)

Click here to read/download the Judgment