Rape

Whenever a serious allegation of being an incestuous father was levelled, higher standard of proof by the credible prosecution witnesses was required

Rare allegation of one of the most serious offences committed in the presence of other children and old father of the convict in the house had been levelled

According to the victim herself, she was beaten by the appellant, therefore, her statement was to be weighed with due care and caution

In the present case the complainant and her brother were not the eye-witnesses but were hearsay witnesses, thus it was an unseen occurrence

Petition was converted into an appeal and was allowed, in circumstances, and conviction and sentence of appellant were set-aside.

Case of the complainant was that minor victim was subjected to rape by the appellant at 2.00 p.m., 2/3 days ago when she was at home

However, the statement of victim recorded without certification of the Presiding Officer about the capacity of the child created doubt about her credibility and, therefore, required strong corroboration

Even otherwise statement of victim revealed that she was beaten and threatened in the presence of her maternal-grand father and brother but no one objected

According to the complainant the victim was brought to the hospital where she was examined in her presence

However, the Medical Officer's opinion was self-contradictory as in her examination in chief she stated that the victim was subjected to rape but in the cross-examination she categorically stated that on the basis of Chemical Examiner's report no rape was found to have been committed with her

Thus, a serious question on the credibility of the statement of the victim and the possibility of false implication of the appellant arose

Petition was converted into an appeal and was allowed, in circumstances, and conviction and sentence of appellant were set-aside.

As per record, the Trial Court had not put the rationality test to the victim/child witness prior to recording of her statement

Under Article 3 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, a child was a competent witness if he/she passed a standard of the sufficient maturity of understanding about the facts which were to be narrated by her

Note/observation by the Court, based on the relevant questions and their answers would make such statement credible

In the given situation the statement of victim needed strong corroboration, which was lacking

Petition was converted into an appeal and was allowed, in circumstances, and conviction and sentence of appellant were set-aside.

Respondent denied the allegations and took a specific stance that he was validly married to the petitioner and no question of raping her existed

Petitioner sought permission to produce certain documents as evidence during trial of the said criminal case, but her petition was rejected

Validity

In the present case, it was the stance of respondent No. 3/accused that he was validly married to the petitioner and the fact in issue in the case was that whether the petitioner was raped by the respondent No.3.

Relevant fact, which was necessary to prove the fact in issue in this case was that whether the respondent No.3 was validly married to the petitioner

To prove the said fact, the respondent No. 3 had already questioned the prosecution witnesses

However, the petitioner, by way of production of documents, now also wanted to produce before the Court the documents in order to prove the relevant facts

Article 161 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, itself allowed the Court to obtain proof of relevant facts by ordering the production of any document, however, it had been provided that the ultimate judgment of the case must be based on a fact duly proved and not otherwise

In this manner, the documents sought to be proved by the petitioner might be received in evidence but the question about their relevancy and proof shall be decided by the Trial Court and it would only be after the declaration of the Trial Court that the said documents were not only relevant but also duly proved that the same would be considered in any manner

Therefore, by merely allowing the petitioner to produce the said documents, no prejudice would be caused to the respondent No. 3 in his defence

Ultimate judgment to be passed by the Trial Court, shall be based upon the facts duly proved as provided under the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, and not otherwise

Petition was allowed, accordingly.

Though Medico-Legal Certificate of the victim and DNA Analysis Report of Forensic Science Agency revealed sexual intercourse by the petitioner with the victim but the Medico-Legal Certificate of the victim did not reveal any marks of violence on the body of victim

Thus, it was yet to be determined at the trial as to whether the sexual intercourse was with consent of the victim or it was forcible

According to section 164 Cr.P.C. statement of the victim she along with her father went to the police station but surprisingly neither victim nor her father got registered FIR and same was registered by the mother of the victim who admittedly was not present in the house at the time of the alleged occurrence

In her section 164 Cr.P.C. statement the victim had not explained as to how the petitioner, being her first cousin, forcibly committed zina with her twice when her father was present in the house/sleeping on the roof top and as to how her relative entered in the house while passing through the street

Pleas raised and put to the victim by the petitioner during cross-examination to her section 164 Cr.P.C. statement also made out a case of further inquiry

On the basis of tentative assessment of the material so far available on record, the case against the petitioner fell within the ambit of further inquiry

Petitioner being in judicial custody was no more required for any further investigation or probe

Despite submission of challan in December 2024, till date the statement of victim and the prosecution witnesses had not been recorded and in that regard no plausible explanation had been offered by the prosecution

Bail could not be withheld as mere punishment

Petition was converted into an appeal and was allowed, in circumstances.

In the case in hand a promise of the marriage was allegedly made by petitioner with victim, as such he obtained her consent on the basis of fraud and allurement and under that pretext victim submitted her body and allowed the petitioner to have sexual intercourse with her

Such like consent is not a consent in the eye of law, which has been obtained by practicing a deception

Victim was subjected to sexual intercourse from time to time by petitioner against her will and without herconsent, as such ingredients of the offence of rape as envisaged in S.375, P.P.C, were squarely fulfilled

Victim had given birth to an illegitimate child, who was at present of the age of 5/6 months

D.N.A. report in the case was positive, which established the petitioner as biological father of said child

Thus, there was no need of any further evidence to establish the offence

Statement of victim recorded under S.161 & 164, Cr.P.C., alone sufficient, which got full corroboration and confirmation from Medico-Legal Report and D.N.A. test report and fact of giving birth to a child by the victim

Prima facie involvement of petitioner in the crime stood fully established

No inference other than that of the guilt of accused could be drawn

No an iota of the material was there to suggest that the case was requiring further inquiry

Act of the petitioner had put prestige and honour of the family of victim on crossroad and spoiled whole of the life of victim and particularly that of child, which presented a dreadful picture

Circumstances did not permit to extent any leniency in favour of the petitioner

Petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

However, the statement of victim must be independent, unbiased and straightforward to establish the accusation.

Trial Court had dealt with the question of eight-month delay in registering the FIR while highlighting conceptions of honor and shame that prevent the reporting of crimes involving sexual abuse

Victim was a twenty-year-old unmarried girl at the time of the occurrence, belonging to a family of laborers and all her siblings were younger than her

Victim not reporting the occurrence to her family was understandable as according to her testimony she was not only fearful of the appellant inflicting harm on her, but was equally fearful of the stigma she and her family would face if the occurrence became a matter of public knowledge

Victim might never have reported the occurrence had she not been impregnated

Victim only revealed her ordeal when her state of pregnancy became physically apparent close to the time of delivery

No presumption could be drawn that the victim falsified the story that the appellant had intercourse with her

Appeal against conviction was dismissed, in circumstances.

Prosecution produced the Medical Officers that administered and oversaw the drawing of samples of blood of the baby girl born to the victim as well as the accused

Prosecution also produced witnesses who testified how the blood samples were handed over by the hospital to the police authorities, how they were kept in the Malkhana and how they were dispatched to Forensic Science Agency for DNA analysis

DNA report had been exhibited in evidence

In this view of the matter, no case had been built up by the defence to establish that the DNA report or its content ought not be read into evidence or that the conclusion drawn from such a report that the appellant was the biological father of the baby born to the victim was erroneous

Appeal against conviction was dismissed, in circumstances.

Trial Court found her testimony credible and reliable and also noted that there was no previous enmity between the complainant and the accused and consequently no motive for the victim to falsely implicate the appellant

Appellant lived in the victim's neighborhood and there was thus no question of the victim being unable to identify the accused

When the complainant reported the crime, she admitted that almost eight months back at the time of registration of the FIR, the victim was pregnant as a consequence of being raped

Victim subsequently delivered a baby girl

Prosecution took samples of the blood of the baby girl as well as the blood of the appellant and the forensic report issued by Forensic Science Agency confirmed that there was 99.99% probability that the appellant was the biological father of the baby girl

DNA report was the corroborative evidence that supported the testimony of the victim

While the Trial Court found that the testimony of the victim inspired confidence, the DNA report confirmed beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant had intercourse with the victim and a baby girl was born as a consequence of such intercourse

Appeal against conviction was dismissed, in circumstances.

Principles relating to the offence of rape stated.

Victim testified that the appellant entered her home under the pretext of asking for water and raped her after instilling fear in her

Victim stated that he was carrying a weapon at that time and raped her in an empty room that was 20 feet away from another room in the house in which her younger siblings were asleep

Rape happened at a time when the victim's parents were away from the house and had taken her younger brother to the hospital

During cross-examination, no inconsistencies in the victim's story could be effectively made out by the defence

In the statement recorded by the appellant in terms of S. 342 of Cr.P.C., he claimed that the victim was blaming him for the act of another person, which act was one of consensual intercourse between the victim and a third person

Said contention stood negated by the DNA report which confirmed the victim's statement that the appellant had intercourse with her

Appellant never took the plea that he did have intercourse with the complainant and that such intercourse was consensual, despite being aware of the DNA report that established that he was the biological father of the baby girl born to the victim

In the event that the appellant had taken the defence that the intercourse was consensual and had proved so through evidence on a balance of probabilities, the onus would then have reverted back to the prosecution, which would need to prove beyond reasonable doubt that such consent had not been given

Appellant, however, made out no such case

Even otherwise, it did not appeal to a prudent mind that an unmarried girl would name an innocent unconnected person to take the fall for a rapist or even for another person where the intercourse was consensual

Victim's testimony sufficiently established mensrea on part of the appellant by making a confidence inspiring testimony that she had not consented to the intercourse which was forced upon her by the appellant

Defence failed to create reasonable doubt either in relation to the actus reus or the mens rea for the crime of rape

Thus, the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant was guilty of the offence of rape

Section 90 of P.P.C holds in any event that a consent given in consequence of fear falls outside the definition of consent

Section 375 of P.P.C defined rape as a man having sexual intercourse with a woman including inter-alia against her will or without her consent or with her consent when it had been obtained by putting her in fear of death or hurt

Prosecution successfully established that the appellant was guilty of an offense in terms of S. 376 of P.P.C

Thus, the findings of the Trial Court with regard to the conviction of the appellant was confirmed

Appeal against conviction was dismissed, in circumstances.

Incident had taken place on 27.03.2018 at about 12:40 noon and the crime report was lodged on the same day at 03:45 p.m. i.e. within almost three hours of the occurrence

Said promptness in lodging the crime report not only confirmed presence of the eye witnesses at the spot but also excluded every hypothesis of deliberation, consultation and fabrication prior to the registration of the case

Appeal was dismissed in circumstances.

Two eye-witnesses unflinchingly supported the complainant while stating that they witnessed the accused committing rape with the minor girl

Said witnesses were subjected to lengthy cross-examination but the defence could not shatter their credibility on material particulars of the incident

Most crucial and star witness of the occurrence was the victim

Victim was about five years old at the time of recording of evidence and the trial Court before recording her testimony put some queries to her in order to determine whether she was competent to understand the questions and after satisfying it on that point, recorded her statement

Victim girl in her statement, in categorical terms raised accusing finger towards the accused to be the person, who took her towards a tube-well, removed her clothes and committed rape with her

Victim faced the test of cross-examination with full confidence and gave graphic details of the incident in a quite natural manner

During cross-examination, victim not only gave the name of her teacher but also her immediate neighbors and class fellows

From the tenor of the statement of the star witness, Court was convinced that what she deposed while appearing in the dock in the Court room was confidence inspiring and no one had tutored her in that regard

Statement of the victim child was quite natural, straightforward, convincing and confidence inspiring leaving no room for the Court to draw any adverse inference

Appeal was dismissed, in circumstances.

Firstly, according to the Medical Officer, private area of the victim was washed prior to her examination, as such there seemed no possibility of availability of semen at the time of examination

Secondly, detection of seminal material in the vaginal swabs of the victim was just a corroboratory piece of evidence and merely due to its non-detection the other overwhelming ocular and medical evidence could not be discarded

Appeal was dismissed in circumstances.

Woman Medical Officer conducted medico-legal examination of the victim and observed that there was bruising of perianal area along with tears of varying sizes and at different positions

Vaginal area seemed intact on naked eye examination and there were signs of dried blood around perianal area and on buttocks

According to the opinion of Woman Medical Officer, sexual assault was committed with the minor girl

Nature of injuries endured by the victim and described by the Medical Officer were sufficient to attract the offence of rape on the touchstone of penetration

Appeal was dismissed, in circumstances.

Occurrence took place on 09.11.2016, but victim took five days to appear before the doctor for her medical examination on 14.11.2016

Woman Medical Officer examined her and expressed her opinion with respect to examination of clothes as no cut, no tear and no hole etc., was present on the clothes

No blood, no urine or vomit was present

For local/specific examination the observation was that no bruise, abrasion, laceration or other type of injury was present, and that vagina admitted one finger and the hymen was old healed and ruptured

Only mild submucosal hemorrhages disappear within 3 to 4 days, whereas "marked" hemorrhages persisted for 11 to 15 days; therefore, if the rape was committed with the victim forcibly, then in five days hymen should not have healed up

In such state of affairs, the story put forth by the prosecution with respect to commission of rape with the victim fell to the ground, because medical examination of victim after five days showed old healed rupture of hymen which was not possible in five days

Moreso, Investigating Officer conceded during cross-examination that Forensic Science Agency Report was received with the opinion that no seminal material was found on the vaginal swabs

Therefore, no support to prosecution story was available in the form of medical evidence

Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Though it was the prosecution case that accused took the victim from the school under the pretext that her mother being indisposed was being treated in the house of co-accused, but Investigating Officer did not join into investigation any Chowkidar, teacher, student or any other person from the school where victim was teaching on the day of occurrence

Investigating Officer also did not join "GB" owner of adjacent workshop or any labourer working there

Moreover, it was in evidence that a petrol-pump was situated just opposite to the place of occurrence but Investigating Officer did not record statement of any person from the said petrol pump, who could have seen the victim going with the accused, or approaching of witnesses at the crime scene later

Thus, prosecution could not prove the place of occurrence where rape was committed

Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Investigating Officer controverted such fact by stating that the complainant or the victim did not produce the clothes and broken string

Investigating Officer did not ask the complainant and the victim to produce the clothes and the broken string

Prosecution leveled allegation against two accused persons

Place of occurrence was reportedly house of co-accused, and allegation against her of guarding the act of rape, was not possible when it was admitted by the witnesses that parents and kids of co-accused were residing in the same house

Said house consisted of only one room which was at a distance of 35 to 40 feet and 5/7 karams from main gate, which was the reason Investigating Officer found co-accused not involved in the commission of offence, therefore, she was acquitted after trial

Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Admittedly, complainant was not the eye-witness of occurrence who reported the matter with the delay of five days on 14.11.2016 and stated that victim did not inform him about the occurrence from her cell phone on the same day

Though the complainant in his statement before the Court stated to have reported the matter through an application on 12.11.2016 which by itself was after three days of the occurrence however, FIR was further delayed for two days and registered on 14.11.2016

In any manner there was apparent delay in reporting the matter to the police and lodgment of the FIR and no explanation whatsoever was available on the record for such delay

Thus, the possibility of due deliberation and consultation by the complainant before reporting the occurrence to the police could not be ruled out of consideration

Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Place of occurrence was disputed because alleged eye-witnesses could not describe or explain it clearly when they deposed that they did not remember that cots were lying in the room and conceded that they did not see any other house-hold articles in the room where alleged occurrence took place

Place of occurrence was further disputed when Investigating Officer did not collect anything incriminating from that place and though witnesses claimed hearing of hue and cry of victim when they reached near the shop of "GB" which was opened yet said "GB" whose workshop was shown adjacent to the house of occurrence was not associated with the investigation nor produced during the trial

From the narration of witnesses, it could safely be held that neither they were present at the place of occurrence nor in any manner witnessed the occurrence

Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

Evidence showed that school was adjacent to the place of occurrence and the star witness/victim conceded during cross-examination that one security guard remained present in school timing at the gate of the school

Victim being grownup lady working as teacher in the school was not expected to blindly follow the accused towards the house of co-accused because she herself conceded that no clinic of a doctor or a nurse was in the house of co-accused

Victim exaggerated during cross-examination that accused caught of her from the gate of the school, dragged her towards the house of co-accused and in that process she received abrasions on the hands and other parts of her body during the scuffle but admitted that she did not show such abrasions to Woman Medical Officer at the time of her medical examination

Alleged place of occurrence was adjacent to school, i.e. workshop of "GB" and opposite to a petrol pump, therefore, it could not be expected that one could drag the victim without notice or alarm to anyone around

Fact of dragging had not been deposed by any other witness, therefore such expression was created by the victim to earn a favour that she was helpless against masculine aggression

Contention of victim about abrasions on her body during such scuffle could not materialized through the medical opinion

Thus, victim was not truthful witness, and her claim of resistence/scuffle with accused could have taken corroborative effect if her complete medical examination revealed some other form of aggression on or around her perineal area, which was missing

Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.

With regard to the blood and semen on the Shalwar of the accused that was removed from his house by his annoyed wife five days after the incident and given to the police, interestingly, no blood was found from the house of the accused which begged the question whether the sexual assault/rape actually took place in his house

Blood and semen was sent to the Chemical Examiner nine days after the incident and remained with the Chemical Examiner for about eleven months

Most witnesses stated that the accused was with the bloodied victim from the time he brought her home to taking her to the local doctor, then to civil hospital and a medical center so it might be that the blood on his shalwar came from the victim during that period although that was not conclusive

With regard to the human sperm being found on the shalwarof accused that was probably the strongest piece of circumstantial evidence against the accused however the shalwar was not kept in safe custody and although sperm had been found on his shalwar there was no evidence that the sperm belonged to him

Even if the sperm did belong to accused it could have been planted by his wife who was annoyed with him, for not living with him and wanted a divorce

Circumstances established that the prosecution had not proved the charge against the accused beyond shadow of any doubt

Appeal against conviction was accordingly allowed.

Record showed that the evidence of three out of the six witnesses, i.e., father of the victim, wife of the accused and mother of the victim was contradictory in how the victim returned home in an injured condition and her level of consciousness

Complainant contradicted himself in his cross examination in a material way with regard to that aspect of the case

With regard to wife of accused, she stated in her evidence that she was at her mother's house when a young boy told her that the victim was lying in a gali near her mother's house

Said witness and her mother came out of her house and saw the victim bleeding in an unconscious condition so they took her to the doctor

Significantly the mother of said witness was not called as a witness to corroborate her story which was at odds with the evidence of mother of the victim who stated in her evidence that on 12.07.2017 the victim came into the house and her condition was not fit and blood was oozing from her private parts and her blood was stained on her shalwar in the back

In her evidence her daughter appeared to be conscious

In any event with regard to such aspect of the case wife of the accused and mother of the victim completely contradicted each other in a material way which casted doubt on their credibility and reliability of their evidence as with the evidence of the complainant with regard to such aspect of the case

Circumstances established that the prosecution had not proved the charge against the accused beyond shadow of any doubt

Appeal against conviction was accordingly allowed.

Record showed that the victim was not produced by the prosecution despite her being about eight years of age and since the accused was known to her as a relative she could easily have identified him as the person who had sexually assaulted her/raped her

Thus, there was no eye witness to the sexual assault/rape

With no eye witness to the rape as such the prosecution case was based on circumstantial evidence which the court must view with great care and caution

Circumstances established that the prosecution had not proved the charge against the accused beyond shadow of any doubt

Appeal against conviction was accordingly allowed.

Record showed that the FIR was lodged six days after the incident which ordinarily might have been fatal to the prosecution case

However, in rape and kidnapping cases the complainant in often given some leeway in lodging the FIR as in such cases the main concern was for the family is to search for the missing person or attend to the sexually assaulted minor at hospital as had been explained in the instant case

However, in present case the accused was named by the victim four days after the incident at the time of her discharge from hospital and yet it still took a further two days for the father to register the FIR which put the Court to some caution

Circumstances established that the prosecution had not proved the charge against the accused beyond shadow of any doubt

Appeal against conviction was accordingly allowed.

Complainant stated in his evidence in chief that, on 12.07.2017 at about 06.30 pm the accused took away his daughter (the victim) on the pretext of buying for her some candies

At 07.30 pm when the accused brought his daughter back she was bleeding and the accused also threatened and harassed her

Accused disclosed that his daughter had suffered injury on account of falling over

However, in his cross examination complainant stated that when accused took his daughter with him he was not at home and he found his daughter at a doctor's clinic

As such, neither did the complainant see the accused leaving with his daughter nor coming back with his daughter and as such his evidence could not qualify as last seen evidence

No other witness saw the victim leaving her house with the accused

Predominant number of witnesses stated that the accused was with the victim when he brought her home however only one witness put the daughter at the house of accused on the fateful day which again was the complainant who stated that the owner of the house of accused disclosed to him that the victim came to him for getting light

Owner however was not examined and as such that part of the complainant's evidence was hearsay and inadmissible especially, as there was no reason for the owner not to be called as a witness in support of the prosecution case which might at least have led to there being some last seen evidence

As such, there was no last seen circumstantial evidence which at any rate was the weakest form of evidence

Circumstances established that the prosecution had not proved the charge against the accused beyond shadow of any doubt

Appeal against conviction was accordingly allowed.

In the present case the victim was 49 years of age while the petitioner/accused was a young lad of 20 years at the time of commission of the alleged offence

Although it was not impossible that a twenty years old boy cannot commit zina with such an older woman but the story told by the victim was not plausible

According to her, the petitioner's mother and his two sisters gave her some intoxicating drink, which made her unconscious and during this period, the petitioner and his friend committed rape with her

It is generally seen in our society that no matter how morally bad one is, he cannot do such kind of act in front of his mother and sisters

Story narrated by the victim did not appeal to reason to the mind of a prudent man

Victim was admittedly a married lady, therefore, medico legal report showing her hymen to be old ruptured was inconsequential

Victim had leveled a specific allegation of intoxicating material being administered to her but neither anything containing intoxicating material was recovered nor any intoxicating material was found in her blood in the medico legal report

Record reflected that the victim had lodged a similar kind of case against another person but the same ended in compromise later on

Such conduct of the victim adversely reflected on her credibility

DNA report was not conclusive and certain about the guilt of the petitioner

Victim had leveled allegation of rape against two persons but according to the report of Forensic Science Agency the co-accused of the petitioner was eliminated as being the contributor of male DNA

This meant that whatever the victim said was not entirely true

Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and allowed, and accused was acquitted of the charge.

Such testimony is vital and unless there are compelling reasons which necessitate looking for corroboration of a statement, the courts should find no difficulty to solely rely on the testimony of the victim of a sexual assault to convict the accused

However, the strict condition for this is that the same shall reflect that it is independent, unbiased and straightforward to establish the accusation against the accused and if the court finds it difficult to accept victim's version, it may seek corroboration from some evidence which lends assurance to her version.

DNA report cannot be treated as primary evidence and can only be relied upon for the purposes of corroboration.

In rape cases the statement of the victim itself in isolation is sufficient for proving the charge against the accused but the strict condition for this is that the same shall reflect that it is independent, unbiased and straight forward to establish the accusation against the accused.

Police party was patrolling in the area where they found complainant who informed while weeping that she was subjected to rape by three accused and at the spot pointed out towards them

Accused persons were arrested at the spot while the third accused escaped from the place of incident, so the matter was reported with remarkable promptitude in which the details of the incident were given by prosecutrix in the natural manner and her testimony was confirmed by the police personnel, who were patrolling the area

No ill will or acrimony had been alleged by the accused persons against the police

Argument that DNA (Deoxyribonucleic Acid) report did not connect the accused with the commission of offence was of no substance as number of factors could contribute in a negative finding vis-à-vis matching DNA profile and even slightest interference in handling the samples could alter the result of DNA report

Solitary statement of victim, if rang true, could be relied upon for the purpose of conviction

Appeal was dismissed.

Victim though stated in her statement that the Zina was forcible, but the Medico-Legal Certificate produced through the Investigating Officer transpired that no signs of violence were observed upon the body of the victim and even no mark of blood or discharge on Shalwar Qameez of the victim were observed

Medico-Legal Certificate had further confirmed that due to body area wash, no samples could be taken

Hymen of the victim though was found ruptured, but except that evidence there was no any solid or concrete evidence to establish that the accused was responsible for such hymen rupture of victim, when otherwise the victim was examined after two days of occurrence and till that time all the evidence were removed by the victim herself by washing her body and certainly the private parts of her body

No human sperm though was detected and non-detection of human sperm had made the statement of victim as doubtful, who otherwise alleged that the accused committed rape with her

Even otherwise, the medical report suggested no injury or sign of violence on the body of the victim and even no spot of semen was found on her clothes and even no sign of sexual intercourse was observed at the time of examination

Circumstances established that the prosecution had miserably failed to prove the charge against the accused beyond the shadow of reasonable doubt

Appeal against conviction was allowed. [Para. 7 of the judgment]

Alleged occurrence took place at evening and according to the victim she on return to her house disclosed to the complainant, the fact of her rape, thus it was expected that the FIR should have been lodged promptly without any delay, but that had not been done so and the FIR was lodged after two days at about 08.30 p.m.

Due to said delay, the entire evidence that was necessary to have been collected by the Investigating Officer were damaged

No explanation on the part of prosecution to justify the delay of two days in lodging the FIR had been furnished

Main effect of registration of FIR promptly was to bring the criminal machinery into motion so that the investigation might be carried out in right direction and to enable the Investigating Agency to collect all the necessary evidence from the place of occurrence

Case of rape/zina certain evidences were required to be collected from the body of victim, but certainly after lapse of two days all the evidences were removed by the victim by washing her body and especially the private parts

Non-registration of FIR promptly had damaged the entire prosecution case

Victim mostly reiterated her early statement and confirmed that soon after her arrival in her house, she disclosed the fact of rape committed with her by the accused, but thereafter when her parents came to house, they lodged the FIR

Such assertion of victim showed that the FIR had been lodged with consultation

Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove the charge against the accused beyond the shadow of reasonable doubt

Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. [Paras. 4 & 7 of the judgment]

Complainant of the case appeared as witness, who though reiterated the contents of his fard-e-bayan but perusal of his statement revealed that the same was based on hearsay evidence, as the complainant did not witness the crime himself rather he uttered whatever was stated to him by the other witnesses and he mentioned the same in his fard-e-bayan

Complainant admitted in his cross-examination that there existed a landed/property dispute in between the accused (convict) and the maternal uncle of complainant and with the allegations of putting into fire the shop and attacking upon him, the accused had lodged FIR against him as well as against his maternal uncle

Complainant also admitted that the accused had also filed a complaint for registration of FIR against him with the allegations of abducting his daughter and also the accused sent notables of the area to his house to enquire about the whereabouts of his daughter

Said admissions of the complainant clearly established the fact that serious disputes were already existing in between the parties

Accused had already lodged FIR against complainant for attacking upon him and also putting into fire his shop and also he had submitted a complaint in police station for registration of another FIR against the accused with the allegations of abducting of his missing daughter

Under the said peculiar circumstances of the case, the false implication of the accused could not be ruled out of consideration

Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove the charge against the accused beyond the shadow of reasonable doubt

Appeal against conviction was allowed. [Paras. 5 & 6 of the judgment]

Statements of both the witnesses were in line with each other to the extent that they had seen the accused taking the victim on his vehicle

Statement of Investigating Officer confirmed that both the witnesses were brought by the complainant of the case himself in police station for recording their statements

Statements of both the witnesses showed that the same were recorded after delay of about 25-days from the date of occurrence

No explanation available on record to establish that as to why the statements of both the witnesses were recorded at belated stage and ambiguities arising in a prudent mind with regard to credibility of the said witnesses as the complainant himself managed and produced the said witnesses before the Investigating Officer for associating them in the investigation

Delay so occasioned in recording their 161, Cr.P.C. statements were not helpful for the case of prosecution due to sole reason that they did not witness the crime directly

Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove the charge against the accused beyond the shadow of reasonable doubt

Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances. [Para. 8 of the judgment]

Section 164-B, Cr.P.C., had not been complied with because no samples for DNA test had been obtained either from the accused or victim despite the fact that the word "shall" was used in the said provision, making its applicability mandatory

Investigation in the case had been complete and the accused was no more required to the prosecution for the very purpose

Case of accused called for further inquiry under subsection (2) of S. 497, Cr.P.C.

Bail application was allowed.

Charge in Court has to be proved through evidence as defined in Art. 2(c) of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, which includes “all statements which the Court permits or requires to be made before it by witnesses, in relation to matters of fact under inquiry

Article 18 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, ordains that evidence can only be given of “fact in issue” and “relevant fact” which commands that Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984 is an exhaustive statute

Evidence can only be given in the manner as permitted by Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984 and no other hypothesis how strong or relevant can be allowed to be brought on record unless Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, permits or accepts it as admissible

What one prosecution witness had observed by her senses could only be deposed by her and none other as required by Art. 71 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984

Other prosecution witness was witness of facts touching preparation of offence as mentioned in Art. 21 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984 and explanatory to fact in issue as per Art. 22 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, when she had seen accused in naked condition with victim, thus her evidence was also admissible

Permission to bring on record relevant evidence is controlled by exclusionary rules

Court while admitting evidence is to refer gist of evidence or question to be asked, objection if any, reply thereto, and decision thereon before it is made part and parcel of judicial record

Where a judge after attending provisions of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984 and precedents on the subject is in doubt as to admissibility of a particular piece of evidence he should declare it in favour of admissibility rather than inadmissibility because its value would later be determined by Court of Appeal as per Art. 162 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984

High Court directed Trial Court to proceed to record evidence of two prosecution witnesses summoned as additional witnesses from the stage it was discontinued

Revision was dismissed accordingly.

It was difficult for a young girl of 14-15 years to level allegation of rape, particularly when she had alleged her pregnancy owing to sexual intercourse by accused

On the day accused committed offence under S. 376, P.P.C., the victim was less than 16 years of age

Victim stated before Trial Court that accused had committed rape with her under the threat that if the fact was disclosed to any person her naked pictures would be uploaded on internet

Case fell within the definition of S. 375, P.P.C. and medical evidence corroborated the allegation of rape

Delay in lodging FIR was of no consequence as accused had committed very heinous offence

High Court declined to take any lenient view against accused

High Court maintained conviction and sentence awarded to accused as Trial Court committed no error in punishing him for imprisonment for ten years

Appeal was dismissed, in circumstances.

During investigation, the victim and other prosecution witnesses had fully supported the case of prosecution in their statements under S. 161, Cr.P.C.

As per provisional as well as final medical certificate rape had been committed with the victim

Alleged offence fell within the ambit of prohibitory clause of S. 497, Cr.P.C.

No doubt there was delay of seven hours in lodging the FIR but delay was well explained by complainant in FIR by stating that soon after the incident, the prosecution witnesses brought victim to his house where victim narrated the facts of the incident to the complainant, thereafter, the complainant brought the victim girl at police station and obtained letter for medical examination, they went to the hospital where her medical examination was conducted and after examination, the complainant again appeared at the police station and lodged the FIR of the incident

Application for grant of bail was dismissed. [Paras. 6 & 7 of the judgment]

Complainant sought cancellation of bail granted to accused in an FIR wherein it was alleged that she was deceitfully cohabited by the accused by inducing a belief of lawful marriage

Complainant and accused knew each other for many years as choir singers and as members of the Youth Leadership Program in the Church

Complainant had attended and witnessed several marriage ceremonies at the Church, and that's why she mentioned in her FIR that pastoral prayer and blessing was necessary to solemnize the marriage

By the very contents of the FIR, it appeared, prima facie, that she turned a blind eye to her own knowledge of the pre-requisites of a valid marriage and, therefore, her stance in the FIR that she was deceived on the basis of the Nikahnama alone was open to doubt and entailed further inquiry

Benefit of doubt even at bail stage had to go to the accused

So far as allegation of rape under S. 375(iv), P.P.C. was concerned, the complainant had nowhere alleged that she believed the accused to be another person to whom she believed herself to be married, for that was an essential ingredient of the referred charge

Petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

Age of victim was mentioned as 16 years in Medico Legal Report however, no reasons whatsoever had been mentioned that on the basis of which evidence, the age was written

Statement of victim was not supported by report of DNA as well as by Medico Legal Report or statement recorded by doctor wherein it was mentioned that no mark of any injury on her body was found

Victim herself washed her clothes and remained silent for 04 days in a small house where she was living with her parents, four brothers and two sisters

Prosecution failed to prove its case against accused beyond reasonable doubt

There were so many defects and contradictions in prosecution case/evidence and prosecution case was doubtful and benefit of the same was to be extended in favour of accused

High Court extended benefit of doubt to accused and his conviction and sentence was set aside, resulting into his acquittal from the charge

Appeal was allowed, in circumstances.

Penetration is sufficient to constitute the offence (of rape) and there are many factors, physical as well as psychological, that may intervene during a carnal assault, impeding complete consummation of carnal assault

Such subsequent failures do not redeem the enormity of initial assault.

Meaning of force in relation to rape need not necessarily indicate physical restraint by the man, though this is most common; even the fear of such violence is sufficient for an act of rape to succeed.

Absence of sperms does not mean that rape has not been committed.

Prosecution case was that the complainant was called by accused on the pretext of giving her a job at a beauty parlor; that the accused along with co-accused took the complainant at an unknown place where some intoxicating material was administered to her through a bottle and that the accused persons thereafter committed rape with the complainant turn by turn

Complainant was admittedly a married lady therefore medico legal report showing her hymen to be old ruptured was inconsequential

True, DNA test report revealed that accused persons could not be excluded being contributors towards the semen detected on the vaginal swabs of the complainant but point for determination before the High Court was as to whether it was a case of rape as alleged by the complainant or it was a case of zina with consent, which was bailable offence

No allegation of forcible abduction was levelled neither was there any medico legal report in support of the allegation of intoxicating material being administered to the complainant nor the bottle containing intoxicating material was recovered

Allegation of rape levelled against the accused required further probe

Co-accused was released on bail by the Sessions Judge on the exonerating statement of the complainant

Case of accused was at par with the case of co-accused

Petition for grant of bail was allowed, in circumstances.

Prosecution case was that paternal niece of complainant was cutting fodder in the field for cattle, accused was also watering his nearby field who finding the victim alone attempted to commit rape with her

Victim while appearing before the Trial Court had reiterated the same story

Delay of two days in lodging of the FIR

Victim had not appeared for her medical examination

Complainant had appeared before the High Court and had extended his no objection on acceptance of the appeal and acquittal of the accused

Appeal filed by accused was accepted, his conviction and sentence awarded by the Trial Court was set aside, in circumstances.

In that background, their presence at the place of occurrence at the relevant time and response shown by them on hearing the hue and cry raised by the victim, as well as their reaction to rescue the victim and catch hold of the perpetrator, when admittedly he was not armed with any firearm weapon, was of pivotal importance

Statements of the said witnesses were at variance qua their reaction on attracting to the place of occurrence and seeing the accused allegedly in naked condition

One of the witnesses claimed that they put effort to apprehend the accused, however, he fled away

Another important aspect of the case was that although both the prosecution witnesses were closely related to the victim but on reaching house of the complainant, they opted to wait for his return and didn't report the matter to the police promptly

Record did not disclose whether they had attempted to make any effort whatsoever to establish contact with the complainant through phone to inform him about such a shocking occurrence

Both the prosecution witnesses were inconsistent with regard to distance between the place of occurrence and house of the victim

All the said facts when taken conjointly created dents with regard to presence of the prosecution witnesses at the place of occurrence as claimed by them

Circumstances established that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the accused beyond shadow of doubt

Appeal was allowed and accused was acquitted by setting aside conviction and sentence recorded by the Trial Court, in circumstances.

Complainant was married with the accused, relations between the parties remained cordial for some time, subsequently the complainant came to know that it was a third marriage of the accused and thereafter difference arose between the parties

Complainant alleged that the accused got filed a suit for dissolution of marriage before Judge Family Court after forcibly obtaining her signatures on the plain papers; that he also forced her to relinquish Haq-ul-Mehr; that after obtaining the decree of dissolution of marriage, accused retained the complainant with him and thereafter raped her for almost 8 months

Held; complainant had submitted an application before Special Judicial Magistrate for lodging her in Dar-ul-Aman but she had not described the facts mentioned in the FIR in her application before the Judicial Magistrate

Subsequently being annoyed with the accused and at the behest of her parents, complainant had got registered the present case

Accused had joined the investigation, nothing was to be recovered from him and no useful purpose would be served by sending him behind the bars

Petition for grant of pre-arrest bail was allowed, in circumstances.

Accused had challenged the Medico Legal Certificate issued by the Woman Medico Legal Officer but the victim was not appearing before the Medical Board, therefore, members as well as chairman of the Medical Board had suspended the Medico Legal Certificate and put it in abeyance

Complainant also did not appear before the Trial Court whereas the accused was in custody

Such conduct of the complainant showed that she had no nexus or concern with the case but wanted the accused to remain behind bars

Accused had made out a good prima facie case for his release on bail within the meaning of subsection (2) of S.497, Cr.P.C.

Petition for grant of bail was allowed, in circumstances.