Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

16(f) The learned counsel also submits that there are vital contradictions in the evidence of the victim girls, namely that none of them have spoken to about the alleged rape in their statements under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. Their subsequent statements are only out of inducement and under pressure and therefore, their evidence cannot be worthy of acceptance.

16(g) According to the learned senior counsel, in rape cases, especially in case of a statutory rape, the date and time are important factors and the longer the time, the more the requirement for corroboration. In case of P.W.14, though the police knew the date of her rape, there is no specific charge.

39. Even though evidence was led in on the side of the defence on the mental condition of Ravi and certain other aspects dealing with the murder of Ravi, we will consider the same in detail while the charge of murder is discussed. Suffice it is to say here that the conspiracy Part-II to commit the murder of Ravi has been clearly established.

IV. Misjoinder of Charges :

40. According to the learned senior counsel for the accused, several charges, viz., rape on 13 victim girls, are rolled into one. In every criminal charge, there must necessarily be a formal accusation and the manner of commission of the alleged acts so that the accused is put on notice and the prosecution binds themselves to establish the said accusation. Every rape is a separate incident committed on different occasions and the allegations in reference to the date, time and the place are not common. The charge framed in reference to rape is therefore violative of the provisions dealing with the charges under the Criminal Procedure Code. It is submitted that the failure to frame a specific charge, being an illegality, the question of invoking Section 464 does not arise for consideration. In this context, a number of decisions have been referred to in support of these submissions.