Acquittal in Rape Sustained Where Evidence Supports Voluntary Participation and Conscious Choice Between Resistance and Assent

The appellant/victim filed an acquittal appeal against the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C.), Surguja, dated 28.01.2022, which acquitted Respondent No. 2 of charges under Sections 376, 323, and 506-B of the IPC

The prosecution alleged that on 15.06.2018, the accused intercepted the victim while she was returning from the bathroom, threatened her, and forcibly committed rape

The victim claimed she informed neighbors that night and her husband upon his return on 17.06.2018, leading to the FIR

However, the Trial Court found the victim to be a consenting party

1. Whether the Trial Court erred in failing to apply the presumption under Section 114-A of the Indian Evidence Act and wrongly inferred consent

2. Whether the ocular testimony of the victim and medical evidence were sufficient to overturn the judgment of acquittal

The Court applied Section 375 of the IPC, which defines "rape" and distinguishes acts done "against her will" from those done "without consent"

It relied on the precedent Kaini Rajan v. State of Kerala (2013), clarifying that "consent" under Section 90 of the IPC is an act of reason involving choice between resistance and assent, to be ascertained from the totality of circumstances

The Court also considered Section 114-A of the Indian Evidence Act regarding the presumption of absence of consent in certain rape prosecutions

The High Court observed that the victim’s own testimony during cross-examination (paragraphs 9 and 10) indicated consensual behavior. She admitted to a conversation with the accused regarding the fear of being seen and the resulting disrepute, to which the accused reassured her

Furthermore, she admitted that she did not resist physically (e.g., biting the accused's hand), did not raise an alarm after the act, and voluntarily went inside to dress

The medical evidence provided by PW/9 further weakened the prosecution's case, as the doctor could not provide a definite opinion on the sexual assault and noted that injuries found were 3-4 days old and caused by blunt objects, failing to corroborate the specific timing of the alleged incident

The Court concluded that the victim, a 40-year-old mother of three, participated in "voluntary participation" after exercising "intelligence based on the knowledge of the significance" of the act

The High Court affirmed that the victim was a consenting party and that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed at the admission stage