Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.67 seconds)

Tameezuddin @ Tammu vs State Of (Nct) Of Delhi on 26 August, 2009

- Shevantabai who is wife of brother-in-law of the prosecutrix has also not supported her. According to prosecution, she had shown the spot to the Police. Obviously, P.W.2-S must have narrated the incident to her but she has also turned hostile. When all these facts are considered in totality, those raise a serious doubt about the evidence of P.W.2-S notwithstanding the consistency in her evidence with the F.I.R. and absence of any effective cross-examination. In such case, there is some corroboration required but there is no corroboration of whatsoever nature. There is no corroboration of medical evidence or ::: Uploaded on - 08/08/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 09/08/2017 00:52:41 ::: 14 Cri.Appeal No.253/2003 other witnesses and not even from her husband. I find that these facts raise a reasonable doubt. Though the evidence of rape victim should not be subjected to minute scrutiny, as observed in Tameeluddin's case, (cited supra), mere statement of rape by raped victim by itself is not sufficient. Her evidence should be probable, logical and should inspire confidence in the mind of the Judge. I find that the evidence of P.W.2-S is not of such a nature.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 271 - Full Document
1