Can the evidence of the prosecutrix be rejected on a Section 366 IPC charge and accepted on a Section 376 IPC charge?
Coram: Justice Ujjal Bhuyan · Justice Atul S. Chandurkar
The evidence of the prosecutrix cannot be rejected on a Section 366 IPC charge and accepted on a Section 376 IPC charge.
No. An accused can be convicted of rape on the sole testimony of the prosecutrix, but only where her statement inspires the confidence of the court. There cannot be partial rejection of her evidence for Section 366 and partial acceptance of the very same statement to prove Section 376; evidence of unimpeachable character must be accepted as a whole. Here the Sessions Judge disbelieved her version to acquit on the Section 366 charge, a finding that attained finality, so the same version could not sustain a conviction under Section 376.
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s.376 — s.366 — Evidence Act, 1872 — s.114A — Rape — Testimony of the prosecutrix — Consent — Part acceptance and part rejection — Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s.376 — s.366 — Testimony of the prosecutrix — No part acceptance — Held: A conviction for rape may rest on the sole testimony of the prosecutrix only if it inspires the confidence of the court; her evidence cannot be rejected on the charge under Section 366 and accepted on the charge under Section 376. (¶28, 29) Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s.376 — Denial of consent — Overall context of testimony — Held further: A prosecutrix's denial of consent is to be read in the overall context of her testimony; mere presence of spermatozoa in the vaginal swab does not prove rape where the surrounding circumstances show she willingly accompanied the accused. (¶25, 26) Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s.376 — Immoral conduct — Hard evidence — Held further: Conduct of the accused that is immoral and unethical does not, without clinching evidence, justify a conviction under Section 376; the charge must rest on hard evidence, not on the presiding judge's value judgment. Conviction set aside; appeal allowed. (¶29, 30)
Headnote
You've used your free headnotes this month
The answer above and the Court's own paragraphs stay free. LexStreak's full headnote on this judgment needs an account — a free one opens it again.
Create my free accountOne judgment a day. That's the whole habit.
Read the full text of PARAMJIT SINGH BEDI v. STATE OF PUNJAB — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.
Create my free accountFree forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India