Inconsistency in victim's testimony and lack of medical corroboration justify acquittal in rape allegations.

The State of Gujarat appealed a judgment dated November 13, 1997, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Rajkot, which acquitted the respondent of charges under Sections 376 (rape) and 506(2) (criminal intimidation) of the IPC

The prosecution alleged that on March 21, 1996, the accused forcibly took the minor victim (aged 14.5 years) to a field and committed rape while threatening her life and her brother's life

The victim further alleged a similar prior incident 15 days earlier

The Trial Court acquitted the accused based on discrepancies in medical evidence, FSL reports, and the victim's testimony

1. Whether the Trial Court erred in its appreciation of the victim’s testimony and medical evidence, warranting a reversal of the acquittal

2. Whether the prosecution proved the charges of rape and criminal intimidation beyond a reasonable doubt

The Court applied Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, concerning appeals against acquittal

It relied on the principle that if the Trial Court’s view is "plausible" or "possible," the Appellate Court should not interfere even if a different view exists, as established in *Darshan Singh v. State of Punjab*

It relied on the principle that if the Trial Court’s view is "plausible" or "possible," the Appellate Court should not interfere even if a different view exists, as established in *Chandrappa v. State of Karnataka*

It relied on the principle that if the Trial Court’s view is "plausible" or "possible," the Appellate Court should not interfere even if a different view exists, as established in *H.D. Sundara v. State of Karnataka*

These precedents dictate that the presumption of innocence is "double fortified" upon acquittal and can only be overturned if the judgment is "utterly perverse" or "palpably wrong"

The Court found the victim’s testimony to be of insufficient "sterling quality" to sustain a conviction

Specifically, the victim admitted she did not know the accused's identity until the Village Sarpanch provided the name after the incident, suggesting the complaint was filed after external deliberation

Furthermore, the alleged site of the second incident was a residential area, making the commission of a forced crime unlikely without detection

Medical evidence failed to show external injuries or signs of sexual assault, and the FSL report contained contradictions regarding the color of the seized clothing (black vs. green)

The Court noted that the delay of four days in filing the FIR was not satisfactorily explained

Consequently, the High Court held that the Trial Court's decision to doubt the prosecution's narrative was a reasonable and plausible interpretation of the evidence

The Court held that the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt and that there were no "substantial and compelling reasons" to interfere with the Trial Court's findings

The bail bond of the respondent was ordered discharged