HC casts doubt over prosecution case and witnesses account

Kolkata: Allowing an appeal by an accused, who was earlier sentenced to seven years imprisonment for rape and one year imprisonment for house tresspass along with a fine, the Single Bench of the Calcutta High Court casted doubt over the prosecution case and the witnesses account.

The matter was heard by Justice Ananya Bandopadhyay. According to the prosecution, the appellant who was the victim’s neighbour entered her house and raped her. The incident took place in 2006. Traumatised, the victim reported the matter to the police two days later. Based on her complaint, a case was registered against the appellant and a chargesheet was filed. Later, the trial court found the appellant guilty. During the hearing, according to a news agency Justice Bandopadhyay observed: “Victim of rape being an injured witness is exclusively categorised as ‘a sterling witness.’ However, such a situation cannot be considered to be universal. There have been instances where offences under Section 376 IPC, 354 IPC along with Section 511 IPC have been framed for malicious intent, false implication and revengetic consideration. The victim being a married lady can easily be a pawn to avenge family disputes. This case is no exception. The lack of evidence and reliability does not give rise to preponderance of probability.” Reportedly, it was observed that the appellant was accused of inappropriately touching the victim by other family members of the household who demanded him to pay Rs 1000 or face a case.

As per a news agency, Court found several lapses in prosecution case and stated it was uncanny the appellant threw the child on the floor and the victim did not raise an alarm and waited for appellant to tie her mouth. It was stated that the appellant was a family member who was ‘presumably at loggerheads with the family of the victim,’ as reported by a news agency.