Conviction under Section 313 IPC requires proof of causation and miscarriage without the woman’s consent.

The appellant was prosecuted on the allegation that he had maintained a sexual relationship with the victim on the promise of marriage, impregnated her, and thereafter administered pills causing miscarriage of a pregnancy of approximately three months.

The FIR alleged offences under Sections 376, 493 and 313 of the IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act.

The medical examination established that the victim was approximately 10–12 weeks pregnant and undergoing an abortion process, but no external injuries were found.

The trial court acquitted the appellant of the offences under Sections 376 and 493 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act, but convicted him under Section 313 IPC and sentenced him to three years’ rigorous imprisonment, with a fine of ₹5,000 and one year’s further imprisonment in default.

The appeal was confined to the conviction under Section 313 IPC.

Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the miscarriage was caused by an act of the appellant.

Whether the prosecution established that the miscarriage was caused without the victim’s consent, as required for conviction under Section 313 IPC.

Whether the evidence of pregnancy, abortion and the victim’s allegation that the appellant administered pills was sufficient to sustain the conviction under Section 313 IPC.

Section 313 IPC criminalises causing a woman to miscarry without her consent and incorporates the essential requirements of the offence under Section 312 IPC.

The prosecution must therefore prove beyond reasonable doubt that the woman was pregnant, that a miscarriage occurred, that the accused’s act caused the miscarriage, and that the act was done without the woman’s consent.

Mere proof of pregnancy and miscarriage, or medical evidence establishing an abortion, is insufficient without proof of causal connection between the accused’s conduct and the miscarriage, together with absence of consent.

The Court relied on Prabhu @ Kulandaivelu v. State of Tamil Nadu, Criminal Appeal No. 1178 of 2011, decided on 18 September 2018, where conviction under Section 313 IPC was held unsustainable when the woman’s consent and the connection between the accused’s act and the miscarriage were not disproved or established respectively.

Although the medical evidence established that the victim was pregnant and undergoing an abortion, it did not conclusively establish that the appellant’s alleged administration of pills caused the miscarriage.

The victim stated that the appellant administered pills, but she did not state that the miscarriage occurred without her consent.

The evidence also disclosed that the victim and appellant had been in a consensual relationship, and no pills, prescription, medical record identifying the substance, or other corroborative evidence was produced to connect the appellant with the miscarriage.

The medical witness acknowledged that miscarriage could occur naturally or due to an external cause.

In the absence of proof of both causation and want of consent, the statutory ingredients of Section 313 IPC were not established beyond reasonable doubt.

The Court consequently extended the benefit of doubt to the appellant.

The appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence under Section 313 IPC were set aside, and the appellant was acquitted by giving him the benefit of doubt.

As the appellant was on bail, his bail bonds were directed to continue for six months under Section 481 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.