Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

103. The prosecution has failed to furnish any explanation in respect of the contradiction, discrepancies and improvements in the statements of the prosecutrix. The inherent contradictions strike at the very root of the prosecution story making it unbelievable and improbable. In the instant case, the evidence and different statements of the victim/prosecutrix suffers from such infirmities and the probabilities due to which the prosecution has come out with a story, which is highly improbable. The Sessions Case Number : 10 of 2013.

FIR No. 63/11, Police Station Nihal Vihar, Under sections 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

State versus Sunder Singh. -:: Page 40 of 52 ::-

-:: 41 ::-

entitled to the benefit of reasonable doubt. Case of the prosecution is to be proved beyond reasonable doubt and cannot take support from weakness of case of defence. In case the evidence is read in totality and story projected by the prosecutrix is found to be improbable, prosecution case becomes liable to be rejected. Prosecutrix knew the accused prior to the incident. If evidence of prosecutrix is read and considered in totality of circumstances along with other evidence on record, in which offence is alleged to have been committed, her deposition does not inspire confidence. Prosecution has not disclosed true genesis of crime. (Reliance can be placed upon the judgment of the hon'ble Supreme Court reported as Narender Kumar v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2012 (5) LRC 137 (SC).

-:: 49 ::-

prosecution evidence, the several discrepancies in the evidence and other circumstances make it highly improbable that such an incident ever took place.

137. In the case of Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharastra, AIR 1984 SC 1622, the Apex Court has laid down the tests which are prerequisites before conviction should be recorded, which are as under:

1. The circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should be fully established. The circumstances concerned 'must or should' and not 'may be' established;

FIR No. 63/11, Police Station Nihal Vihar, Under sections 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

State versus Sunder Singh. -:: Page 49 of 52 ::-

-:: 50 ::-

It also stands established that the accused had not raped the prosecutrix. There is no medical or forensic or circumstantial evidence to show that such an offence has ever been committed. There is no incriminating evidence against the accused. The gaps in the prosecution evidence, the several discrepancies in the evidence and other circumstances make it highly improbable that such an incident ever took place.