Srinagar, Oct 2: The High Court of J&K and Ladakh has set aside the conviction of a man in a 2007 rape case, noting that the benefit of doubt is a necessary consequence of the prosecution’s failure to cross the required threshold of proof.
A bench of Justice Sanjay Parihar, while overturning the October 10, 2023 judgment by Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Budgam, convicting one Muhammad Ashraf Ganie and the November 7, 2023 order quantifying his punishment, held that the prosecution failed to establish the charges beyond reasonable doubt.
The trial court had sentenced Ganie to seven years’ rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs 1 lakh under Section 376 of the erstwhile RPC, five years’ rigorous imprisonment under Section 450, and one year’s simple imprisonment under Section 506, with the sentences to run concurrently.
Ganie had challenged the trial court’s decision convicting him in a criminal appeal before the High Court, which allowed the appeal.
The case arose from FIR No. 309/2007 registered at Police Station Budgam concerning an alleged incident of July 15, 2007. The prosecution case was that Ganie entered the house when the prosecutrix was alone, threatened her and committed rape. The FIR was initially registered under Sections 376/511 RPC, relating to rape and attempt to rape, but Section 511 was subsequently dropped and Sections 450 and 506 RPC were added after the medical examination.
In response to the appeal, the High Court observed that the earliest version of the case referred to an attempt to commit rape, while the prosecution case later developed into one of completed rape. The Investigating Officer had acknowledged that the statements of the material witnesses recorded during investigation initially referred to an attempt, it noted.
The court also noted that the distinction between an attempted and a completed act was not a minor discrepancy but went to the very nature of the principal offence. The subsequent explanation offered by the prosecutrix did not entirely remove the doubt arising from the variation, it said.
With regard to medical evidence, the court noted that while the doctor found that sexual intercourse had taken place, the medical examination could not establish when the intercourse occurred or identify the person involved.
Moreover, the court held that no biological or forensic material connecting Ganie with the alleged act was obtained.
The court’s decision on the appeal also referred to inconsistencies concerning the timing of the medical examination, the movements of the witnesses, the preparation of the complaint and other circumstances.
While the court held that individual minor discrepancies would not ordinarily be sufficient to reject a prosecution case, it said their cumulative effect had to be considered.
Furthermore, the court held that Ganie’s failure to establish his plea of alibi could not be treated as affirmative proof of the prosecution case. It said that the prosecution must succeed on the strength of its own evidence and that a weakness in the defence cannot cure deficiencies in the prosecution case.
While the court noted that a criminal conviction requires proof beyond reasonable doubt, it said the cumulative circumstances created reasonable doubt regarding the prosecution version.
“Where two reasonably possible views emerge from the evidence, the view favourable to the accused must prevail. The benefit of doubt is not a matter of grace but a necessary consequence of the prosecution’s failure to cross the required threshold of proof,” the court said.
The court concluded that, on an independent reappraisal of the entire evidence, it was unable to hold that the prosecution had established the charges against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. “The findings of the trial court, therefore, cannot be sustained,” it said.
Accordingly, the court set aside the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court and acquitted Ganie of the charges under Sections 376, 450 and 506 of the RPC by extending to him the benefit of doubt.
About The Author
