Excelsior Correspondent
SRINAGAR, Mar 27: High Court held the acquittal of a person from rape charges by the trial court as valid by recording that the interference with the order of acquittal in a routine manner without any good reason is not permissible.
“It is a beaten law that the appellate court interferes with the order of acquittal only under compelling circumstances when the impugned order is found to be perverse. The appellate court has to be bear in mind presumption of innocence of the accused and further that the Trial Court’s acquittal bolsters presumption of his innocence”, the Division Bench of Justice Tashi Rabstan and Justice Sanjay Dhar said while holding the trial court verdict as valid and good.
Court said, the statement of the prosecutrix when evaluated in the light of the surrounding circumstances established on record leads us to only one conclusion that she had out of her free will and choice accompanied the accused. “Thus, the statement of the prosecutrix has been properly analyzed and appreciated by the Trial Court in the light of other material on record”, reads the judgment.
The DB therefore, did not find any reason to take a view, which is different from the view taken by the Trial Court and accordingly dismissed the appeal filed by the prosecution against the judgment of trial court.
The instant appeal was directed against the judgment dated 30.04.2014 passed by the Sessions Judge, Udhampur, whereby the Trial Court while dismissing the charge-sheet arising out of FIR No. 141/2012 for offences under Sections 366 and 376 RPC has acquitted the accused-Ravi Kumar.
The DB mentioned that the prosecutrix in her cross-examination has admitted that she was learning tailoring from Sonu Devi and she has also admitted that she also knows Pooja Devi. Pooja Devi and Sonu Devi have confirmed that the prosecutrix was working in the Handicraft Center with them and was in deep love with the accused.
“From the foregoing statement of the prosecutrix, defence witnesses and the statement of the doctor, it becomes clear that the prosecutrix, who was a major person, possessing sound mind at the relevant time, was having an affair with the accused. The defence of the accused that the prosecutrix had accompanied him out of her own will and without any force, gets established from the foregoing evidence”, reads the judgment.
The DB as such concluded that the finding of the Trial Court that the prosecutrix had eloped with the accused out of her own will and that it was not a case of forcible sexual intercourse, appears to be logical and well founded.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel