Karnataka HC Acquits Man Of Rape And Section 366A, Finding No Proof Victim Was Under 18 Or That He Raped Her

The appellant, Accused No. 1, was convicted by the Sessions Court under Sections 366A and 376 of the IPC and sentenced to imprisonment and fines; the other charges against him were acquitted

The prosecution alleged that he took the complainant from her home, married her, and had sexual relations with her.

Section 366A of the IPC requires proof that a girl under eighteen was induced to go from a place or do an act, with the requisite intent or knowledge that she would be forced or seduced to illicit intercourse; the Court stated that the contemplated intercourse must be with a person other than the accused who induced her

Section 375 of the IPC defines rape by specified forms of penetration and circumstances in which the act constitutes rape, including absence of consent and consent obtained under the circumstances specified in the section

The Court also noted that Section 198 of the CrPC bars cognizance of an offence under Section 494 of the IPC on a police report, though the trial court had acquitted the accused of that offence

The Court held that the prosecution had not reliably proved the complainant’s age to be below eighteen: although school documents indicated a date of birth that would place her below eighteen, the issuing officials were not examined, while the medical evidence placed her age between eighteen and twenty-one

It also found no evidence that the appellant induced her to go somewhere with the intent or knowledge required by Section 366A

As to Section 376, the Court found no legally sufficient evidence of rape, noting the absence of supporting evidence in the medical certificate and the investigating officer’s failure to charge the appellant under that section, despite the trial court framing a charge

It directed the trial court to refund any fine deposited and ordered the appellant’s bail bond cancelled