Absence of Medical Evidence and Victim's Improbable Conduct Establishes Consent, Negating Charges of Kidnapping and Rape.

The appellant was convicted by the Trial Court under Sections 363 and 376 of the IPC for allegedly kidnapping a 14-year-old girl (P.W. 6) on 02.11.2012 at gunpoint and committing rape over a period of 5-6 days

The prosecution alleged the victim was abducted on a motorcycle and taken to Darbhanga and later recovered at Khajauli Railway Station

The appellant challenged the judgment dated 12.01.2016, contending that the victim was a consenting party and the allegations were improbable due to prior enmity between the families

1. Whether the prosecution proved the charges of kidnapping and rape under Sections 363 and 376 IPC beyond a reasonable doubt given the medical evidence and the conduct of the victim

2. Whether the testimony of the victim (P.W. 6) regarding being held at gunpoint for several days in public places was credible and consistent with the circumstances

The Court applied Section 363 (Punishment for kidnapping) and Section 376 (Punishment for rape) of the Indian Penal Code

It emphasized the necessity of corroborative evidence in sexual assault cases where the victim's testimony lacks inherent credibility or inspires doubt

The court also considered the medical jurisprudence regarding the absence of external or internal injuries and the lack of spermatozoa as per the pathological report

The Court found the victim’s narrative highly improbable and inconsistent with human conduct. It noted that the victim claimed to be held at gunpoint while on the pillion of a motorcycle for two hours and later on a train, yet she failed to raise an alarm despite ample opportunities in public spaces

The medical examination by P.W. 8 (Dr. Garagi Sinha) revealed no internal or external injuries and no medical evidence of rape, suggesting a lack of resistance

Furthermore, the Court observed that the victim remained in the appellant's company for nearly a week without attempting to escape, even when left alone in a room, which pointed toward her being a consenting party

The Court also highlighted the admission of prior "inimical terms" between the families, suggesting the possibility of false implication

The High Court set aside the judgment of conviction dated 12.01.2016 and the order of sentence dated 25.01.2016. The appellant was acquitted of all charges and discharged from his bail bonds. The appeal was allowed