LexSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH versus BABUL NATH
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH v. BABUL NATH AUGUST 12, 1994 [DR. A.S. ANAND AND FAIZAN UDDIN, JJ.] Indian Penal Code, 1860 : ·Sections 375, 376-Rape--lngredients- Evidence-Appreciation of-Child victim aged about 5 Years-Found lying in semi-conscious condition in pool of bloorJ-Accused seen running away from C scene. of occumnce--Medical Evidence establishing sexual assaulr-Convic- tion by Trial court-Acquittal by High Court-Held High Court fell into serious error in assessing evidence-Acquittal of accused totally unmeriterl-Courts to be sensitive in dealing with crimes against girl child. D Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 : Sections 154, 161-FIR-Statement made to police-Held not substan- tive piece of evidence-To be used only to corroborate or contradict the witness. E Constitution of India : F Article 136-Appeal against acquitta~Appraisal of evidence-Held to be made if High Court erred in assessing evidence and its findings vitiated by error of law of procedure of found contrary to principles of natural justice or manifestly perverse, resulting into grave injustice. The respondent was charged and tried for an offence punishable under section 376 IPC for committing rape of a child aged about 5 years. The prosecution case was that at about 4 P.M. on 15.3.1977 PW 1 to PW 3, while passing by the side of a grove, heard screams and cries of a girl. They reached the place of occurrence and saw the victim lying down on the G ground in a semi-conscious state with her private part profusely bleeding. They saw the respondent running away arranging his 'dhoti'. They ar- ranged for a small cot and took the girl thereon and proceeded on foot to the police station where PW 1 made a written report. The police registered the case against the accused and got the girl medically examined. The lady H doctor, after describing the injuries found on the private part of the victim, 598 '' STATE v. BABUL [FAIZAN UDDIN.I.] 599 opined that the girl was subjected to sexual intercourse. The trial court, A relying on the evidence of PW l supported by the medical evidence, convicted the accused of the offence charged and sentenced him for im- prisonment for 5 years. On appeal, the High Court, disbelieving the prosecution case, set aside the conviction and acquitted the accused. Aggrieved, the State filed the appeal by the special leave. B Allowing the appeal, this Court HELD : l. The Trial Court rightly convicted and sentenced the respondent as the oral evidence coupled with the medical evidence clearly establishes that the respondent was responsible for sexual assault on the C girl aged about 5 years. The judgment of the High Court is based on surmises and conjectures and its appreciation of evidence is absolutely faulty. [607-B] 2.1. This Court, in an appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution, does not normally reappraise the evidence by itself and go into the question D of credibility of the witnesser, and the assessment of the evidence by the Iligh Court is accepted as final unless the appreciation of evidence and finding is vitiated by any error of law of procedure "or found contrary to the principles of nature justice, errors of record and misreading of the evidence, or where the conclusions of the High Court are manifestly E perverse and unsupportable from the evidence on record. [603-D, E] 2.2. In the instant case, the evidence on record, particularly the statement of the eye-witness, PW 1, as well as the medical evidence and the law relating to the commission of offence of rape indicates that the High Coor! fell into serious error in assessing the evidence correctly and F holding that the victim subjected only to an indecent assault and was not subjected to sexual intercourse. [603-•", G] 2.3 The High Court, while appreciating the evidence of the doctor, PW 6, observed that she conceded that the injuries found on the private part of G the girl could also be caused by instrument like a piece of glass and on that basis took the view that the opinion of the doctor that rape was committed on the girl became doubtful. This finding is wholly unwarranted and per- verse for the reason that simply because the injuries fonnd on the private part of the girl could also be caused in several other ways than the sexual assault on the victim cannot lead to the conclusion that the injuries on her H 600 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1994) SUPP. 2 S.C.R. A private part were not sustained by c
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.