Conviction for Rape Quashed Due to Uncorroborated Testimony of Victim and Absence of Medical Evidence

The appellant was convicted by the Trial Court under Sections 376(1) and 417 of the IPC for allegedly establishing a physical relationship with the informant (P.W.-1) on a false pretext of marriage starting in October 2017

The informant alleged that this relationship resulted in pregnancies and forced abortions

Following a village panchayati where the appellant refused to marry the victim, a First Information Report (FIR) was lodged in 2018

The prosecution examined seven witnesses, including the victim and a medical officer. The Trial Court acquitted the appellant of Section 313 IPC (causing miscarriage without consent) but convicted him of rape and cheating

The appellant challenged this conviction on the grounds of consensual relationship, lack of medical corroboration, and delayed FIR

1. Whether the conviction under Section 376(1) and Section 417 of the IPC can be sustained solely based on the uncorroborated testimony of the victim when medical evidence and other witness statements contradict or fail to support her claims?

The court applied Section 376(1) (punishment for rape) and Section 417 (punishment for cheating) of the Indian Penal Code

It relied on the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that for a conviction to be based on the sole testimony of a victim, such testimony must be inherently reliable and consistent

Furthermore, the court examined the distinction between a "false promise of marriage" (vitiating consent under Section 90 IPC) and a "breach of promise," noting that material contradictions and a lack of corroboration from medical evidence (Dr. Vibha Rani, P.W.-7) weaken the prosecution's case

The Court found that the prosecution's case rested entirely on the statement of P.W.-1, which lacked external corroboration

Specifically, the medical evidence provided by P.W.-7 categorically stated there was no sign of recent sexual assault, no evidence of pregnancy, and no evidence of abortion, directly contradicting the victim's primary allegations

The Court observed that the victim frequently changed her version of events—varying her statements between the police, the village panchayati, and the trial court-specifically regarding whether the initial act was "forcible" or based on a promise of marriage

Additionally, other prosecution witnesses (P.W.-3, P.W.-4) admitted they had no personal knowledge and were merely repeating what the victim told them

The Court concluded that in the absence of independent corroborative material and given the significant contradictions in the victim's testimony, the conviction was not legally sustainable

The Court allowed the appeal, quashed and set aside the judgment of conviction dated 23.11.2021 and the order of sentence dated 26.11.2021. The appellant was acquitted of all charges and discharged from the liability of his bail bond