KAINI RAJAN versus STATE OF KERALA

Citation: [2013] 10 S.C.R. 196 · Decided: 19-09-2013 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 4 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
[2013] 10 S.C.R. 196 
KAINI RAJAN 
v. 
STATE OF KERALA 
(Criminal Appeal No.1467 of 2013) 
SEPTEMBER 19, 2013 
[K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND A.K. SIKRI, JJ.] 
Penal Code, 1860 - s.376 - Rape - Allegation that 
appellant raped PW2 - PW2 had previous acquaintance with 
C appellant, he being her elder brother's friend - Conviction of 
appellant by Courts below - Propriety - Held: The alleged 
incident occurred early morning at 8.30 AM and the place of 
the alleged incident was on the side of a public road - If PW2 
had made any semblance of resistance or made any hue and 
D cry it would have attracted large number of people from the 
locality - Further the FIR was lodged 10 months after the 
alleged incident- All these factors cast some shadow of doubt 
on the version of PW2 - Further, strange behaviour of the 
parents of PW2 viz. PW3 and PW4 - They stated that they 
E came to know about the relations between the appellant and 
PW2 when they found her pregnant - PW2 had told them that 
appellant had agreed to many her - They knew the appellant 
and his family already, however, they did not approach the 
appellant or his family members formarrying PW2 - Instead 
F they straightaway went to the police station to lodge the report, 
that too after the birth of the child - All these factors cast a 
doubt on the prosecution version - Version of a rape victim 
commands great respect and acceptability, but, if there are 
some circumstances which cast some doubt in the mind of 
G the court about the veracity of the victim's evidence, then, it 
is not safe to rely on the uncorroborated version of the victim 
of rape - Conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant 
accordingly set aside. 
H 
196 
KAINI RAJAN v. STATE OF KERALA 
197 
Penal Code, 1860 - s. 375 - Rape - Consent - Meaning 
A 
of 
According to the prosecution, in the morning when 
PW2 was proceeding to the Khadi Centre from her house, 
the accused-appellant, a friend of her brother, caught 
8 
hold of her by hand and forcibly took her to a nearby 
compound and committed rape on her, without her 
consent. She tried to make a hue and cry, but was 
silenced by the accused by stating that he would marry 
her. Even after this incident, he had sexual relationship 
C 
with her 'on more than one occasion. PW2, later, became 
pregnant and gave birth to a boy. Appellant not only did 
not kept his promise to marry her, but even disputed the 
paternity of the child. PW2 then lodged a complaint" in 
Police Station. 
D 
PW2 deposed that she had previous acquaintance 
with the appellant, he being her brother's friend. As per 
her version, on few occasions there were sexual 
encounters between the parties, after the first alleged 
incident. She accepted that they were consensual and 
E 
she was a willing party, though she did so on the 
promise of the appellant that he would marry her. In 
respect of these subsequent acts between the parties, 
the appellant was charged with the offence under Section 
417 IPC. In regard to the first incident, the appellant was 
F 
charged under Section 376 IPC, as the prosecution case 
was that it was forcible and without the consent of PW2. 
The trial Court acquitted the appellant of the charge 
under Section 417 IPC, but convicted him under Section 
376 IPC and sentenced to him undergo rigorous G 
. imprisonment for seven years. The High Court upheld the 
order of conviction and sentence, and therefore the 
instant appeal. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
H 
198 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2013] 10 S.C.R. 
A 
HELD:1. Section 375 IPC defines the expression 
"rape". "Consent", for the purpose of Section 375, 
requires voluntary participation not only after the exercise 
of intelligence based on the knowledge of the 
significance and moral quality of the act but after having 
B fully exercised the choice between resistance and assent. 
Whether there was consent or not, is to be ascertained 
only on a careful study of all relevant circumstances. 
[Para 12] [203-F; 204-A-C] 
C 
State v. Mango Ram (2000) 7 SCC 224: 2000 (2) Suppl. 
SCR 626 - relied on. 
2.1. The consistent version of PW2, her mother 
(PW3), and her father (PW4) is that PW2 had previous 
acquaintance with the accused being her elder brother's 
D friend for a period of more than two years before the date 
of incident. The place of the alleged incident and the time 
is very crucial, so for as this case is concerned. It was 
early morning at 8.30 AM and the place of the alleged 
incident was o

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.