MADAN LAL versus STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR

Citation: [1997] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 337 · Decided: 06-08-1997 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: G.N. RAY · Disposal: Dismissed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

-'lo 
MADAN LAL 
A 
v. 
STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR 
AUGUST 6, 1997 
[G.N. RAY AND G.B. PATTANAIK, JJ.] 
B 
Indian Penal Code, 1860 : 
Section 376 read with Section 511-Attempt to commit rape-Order of 
acquittaf-Interference by appellate court-When-Held, there is no /imitation C 
on the part of the appellate court to review the evidence upon which an order 
of acquittal is founded-Appellate Court should interfere on being satisfied 
that the view taken by the trial court is unreasonable-If two views are possible 
on a set of evidence, the appellate court should not disturb the order of 
acquittal-Criminal Proce<fure Code, 1973, Section 386. 
D 
Section 376-0ffence of attempt to commit rape-Completion 
of-When-Accused failed to penetrate the erected penis into vagina but 
ejaculated upon robbing the private part of the victim-Held, the accused 
must have gone beyond the stage of preparatio11-Vnder the facts and cir-
cumstanc~s. the offence of an attempt to commit rape has been clearly E 
established. 
Criminal Triaf-Sections 376 read with 511 !PC-Attempt to commit 
rape-Testimonial potency of victim's version-Assessment of-Held, the 
human psychology and behavioural probability must be looked into-No p 
woman of honour would falsely accuse a person of committing rape since she 
sacrifices thereby what is dearest to her. 
Criminal Triaf-Sections 376 read with 511 !PC-Attempt to commit 
rape-Evidence of prosecutrix-Evaluation of-Held, the whole evidence has 
to be looked into and it cannot be examined by picking one statement in the G 
cross-examination to find out whether she is a trnthful witness or 1101. 
Appellant - accused was the Head Master of a School and was 
charged under Sections 376/511 I.P.C. read with S.342 for the commission 
of offence of "attempt to commit rape" of the prosecutrix, a student of the H 
337 
338 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1997) SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 
A same school. It was alleged that the appellant sent to prosecutrix and two 
other girls students, PWs 1 and 2, to his residence at about 9 A.M. for 
cooking his meal. The appellant came home between 10 A.M. and 11 A.M. 
and directed PWs 1 and 2 to leave but detained the prosecutrix for cleaning 
the utensils. Thereafter the appellant forced the prosecutrix for illicit 
B sexual intercourse and allowed her to go home at 3 P.M. The mother of 
the prosecutrix, came only in the evening and the prosecutrix immediately 
narrated the incident to her mother, who accompanied by PWs 17 and 23 
gave a written report early morning on the next day to the police and a 
case was registered against the accused under Section 376/342 I.P.C. The 
C Doctor who examined the prosecutrix found the hymen of the p~secutrlx 
intact and opined that no definite opinion could be given regarding the 
attempt of sexual intercourse. 
Trial Court acquitted the appellant ·accused of the said charges on 
the ground that the two material witnesses, PWs-1 and 2, have not sup-
D ported the prosecution case; that the prosecutrix and PWs 1 and 2 were 
absent from the school on the relevant day after 9 A.M. has not been 
established and even if their absence is assumed, the said circumstance 
cannot be an incriminating evidence against the accused; that the accused 
was present in the school till 1 P.M. as per the evidence of 3 school 
E teachers; that the evidence of the Doctor, has shaken the credibility of the 
prosecution version; that the presence of semen on the salwar of the 
prosecutrix has not been estabiished to be that of the accused and there 
is no explanation for the delayed seizure of salwar in question; that the 
evidence of mother was rejected as she was influenced by PWs 17 and 23, 
F who had accompanied her to the Police Station, as they were partisan and 
had animus with the accused; and that since the testimony of the 
prosecutrix did not inspire confidence, it is unworthy of acceptance and is 
contradicted by the medical evidence itself. 
State appealed to the High Court against the order of acquittal. The 
G Division Bench of the High Court reversed the order of acquittal and 
convlcti!d the appellant in respect of the said charges on the ground that 
the entire approach of the trial court in the matter of appreciation of 
evidence lacked objectivity; that the circumstances proved by the prosecu-
tion evidence corroborated the version of the prosecutrix and made her 
H statement acceptable and believable, the circumstances being • (i) the 
MADANLALv. STATE 
339 
absenc
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.