Love Letters Written By Victim Not Under Pressure: Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Acquittal Of Accused In Rape Case
The Himachal Pradesh High Court said that the statement of the victim cannot be believed that even after commission of the alleged sexual assault by the accused upon the victim, her family would invite the accused and his brother to prepare the meal.
Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Justice Sushil Kukreja, Himachal Pradesh High Court
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has upheld the acquittal of a man in an alleged rape case, saying that the love letters were not written by the victim under any pressure.
The Court was deciding an Appeal filed by the State under Section 378 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC), challenging the Judgment of the Special Judge by which the accused was acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 506, and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) read with Section 3(i)(xii) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act).
A Division Bench of Justice Vivek Singh Thakur and Justice Sushil Kukreja observed, “The perusal of love letters, Ex. P4 to P40, nowhere reflects that the same were written by the prosecutrix under any kind of pressure. In fact, these letters are pure reflection of feelings of the prosecutrix towards the accused. The defence of the accused is that the prosecutrix was obsessed towards him, which was opposed by her family and by him when the letters written by her to him became public, then false case was got registered against him.”
The Bench said that the statement of the victim cannot be believed that even after commission of the alleged sexual assault by the accused upon the victim, her family would invite the accused and his brother to prepare the meal.
Senior Additional Advocate General (AAG) I.N. Mehta appeared on behalf of the Appellant/State while Advocate Upasana Thakur appeared on behalf of the Respondent/Accused.
Factual Background
The victim in this case, stated that the accused-Respondent committed forcible sexual intercourse with her on three different occasions in 2011. She alleged that the accused threatened her to do away with her life and he wrote letters with an intention to black mail her. She further stated that the accused used caste-based remarks for her and her family members and threatened to eliminate them. As per her, she had purchased a ladies suit from one shop and the accused paid for the same without her consent. The matter was reported to the Pradhan of the concerned panchayat, where the accused allegedly apologized.
A complaint was made to Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM) and during investigation, the victim was medically examined. As per the prosecution story, the accused caught hold of the victim by her arm and she was rescued by her husband. It was also alleged that the accused used to disturb peace and used caste-based remarks against the victim and her family members frequently. The Trial Court acquitted the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 506, and 376 of the IPC read with Section 3(i)(xii) of the SC/ST Act. Hence, this was under challenge before the High Court.
Reasoning
The High Court after hearing the contentions of the counsel, noted, “We have gone through the statement of the prosecutrix and after going through the same minutely, it cannot be said that her testimony is confidence inspiring, truthful and corroborated with other evidence. Though, the prosecutrix has leveled the allegation of rape against the accused, however, there is no evidence to establish such allegation. After close scrutiny of her testimony, it can be said that on major aspects, she was deliberately ambiguous and kept on changing her stand. As per the prosecutrix, the accused raped her thrice, but she could not narrate the dates when the accused committed rape on her. She could not even state the month or the year when she was raped by the accused. She did not give any explanation as to why she did not make any complaint qua threatening and commission of rape by the accused.”
The Court added that the perusal of the love letters fully probablized the defence of the accused and the same nowhere demonstrates that the same were written under any kind of pressure.
“Kushal Kumar (PW-10), the then President, Gram Panchayat, only deposed that accused was abusing the villagers in an inebriated state and only simple allegations were leveled in the complaint made to him against the accused. This witness did not state that any caste based remarks were used by the accused against the prosecution. PW-12 Prithvi Singh also deposed on the above analogy, thus his deposition is also not helpful to the prosecution case”, it further said.
The Court also observed that even if it is presumed that the allegation of atrocity levelled by the victim against the accused is correct, but the letters written by the victim to the accused completely rules out any possibility of atrocity on the victim by the accused.
“Hence, in view of the entire evidence on record, particularly, the statement of the prosecutrix, it has become clear that there is nothing on record, which could, even remotely, establish the guilt of the accused beyond the scope of reasonable doubt. The evidence on record neither establishes the sexual assault nor any atrocity upon the prosecutrix by the accused”, it concluded.
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the Appeal and upheld the acquittal of the accused.
Cause Title- State of Himachal Pradesh v. Mam Raj (Neutral Citation: 2025:HHC:29284-DB)
Appearance:
Appellant: Senior AAG I.N. Mehta
Respondent: Advocates Upasana Thakur and Karan Singh Kanwar.
