SC Holds Prosecutrix To Be Major And Sex Consensual While Acquitting Man In Rape Case
SC Holds Prosecutrix to be Major and Sex Consensual While Acquitting Man in Rape Case
Background:
In criminal cases involving sexual offenses, especially under Section 375/376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the age of the prosecutrix and the consent of sexual intercourse are critical issues. The Supreme Court has laid down strict parameters to protect innocent accused from wrongful conviction, particularly where:
The prosecutrix is found to be major (above 18 years).
There is credible evidence to show that sexual intercourse was consensual.
There is lack of corroborative evidence supporting the charge of rape.
The version of prosecutrix is inconsistent, exaggerated, or contradicted by medical or other evidence.
Key Principles:
Age of the Prosecutrix
If the prosecutrix is a major (above 18 years), the offence is different from statutory rape (which is strictly a no-consent offence).
The question of consent or coercion becomes crucial.
Consent
In cases involving major girls, consent is a crucial factor.
Mere allegation of rape cannot suffice; prosecution must establish absence of consent beyond reasonable doubt.
Consensual sex between adults does not constitute rape.
Acquittal Where Consent Is Established or There Is Doubt
SC has held that if evidence shows the sex was consensual, or if there is reasonable doubt, accused must be acquitted.
The benefit of doubt goes to the accused in criminal cases.
Medical Evidence and Corroboration
Medical evidence is a strong tool to test the prosecutrix’s version.
Absence of injury, delay in lodging complaint, inconsistent statements, or evidence of a consensual relationship can negate charge of rape.
Important Supreme Court Judgments:
1. State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh, AIR 1996 SC 1393
SC emphasized the requirement of corroboration in rape cases and held that conviction cannot be based on sole testimony without corroboration.
Consent and age are critical factors in assessing the case.
Where consent is established, the accused is entitled to acquittal.
2. Tukaram S. Dighole v. State of Maharashtra, (2010) 4 SCC 329
SC held that in cases involving major girls, consent is a significant factor.
Mere assertion by prosecutrix is insufficient without corroboration.
Acquittal is warranted if sex is consensual.
3. Kanhaiya Lal Verma v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1961 SC 1640
The Court noted that in the absence of force, coercion or threat, sexual intercourse with a major girl cannot be termed as rape.
Emphasized strict proof beyond reasonable doubt to convict.
4. State of Himachal Pradesh v. Manbir Singh, (2006) 8 SCC 405
SC acquitted accused where prosecutrix was major and evidence showed consensual intercourse.
Stress on the fact that sexual act with a major girl, if consensual, is not rape.
5. Bimala v. State of Odisha, AIR 1979 SC 1275
SC observed that false implication of accused is common in rape cases.
Courts should exercise caution and test the prosecutrix’s version by medical and other evidence.
Application of Principles:
In cases where SC has acquitted accused based on prosecutrix being a major and consensual sex, the following judicial reasoning is typically applied:
Verification of Age: Birth certificate, school records, or other documents prove prosecutrix is above 18.
Examination of Consent: Statements, conduct, delay in reporting, and medical evidence examined to determine consent.
Medical Evidence: Absence of injury, hymen rupture consistent with consensual sex.
Inconsistencies and Motive: Possible motive to falsely implicate is considered.
Benefit of Doubt: Where evidence is doubtful, accused is acquitted.
Summary:
| Factor | Role in Acquittal |
|---|---|
| Prosecutrix Major | Consent becomes critical element |
| Consent | If proved, no offence of rape |
| Medical Evidence | Corroborates consensual sex or disproves force |
| Delay/Inconsistencies | May indicate fabrication or false implication |
| Burden of Proof | On prosecution to prove absence of consent |
Conclusion:
The Supreme Court protects the accused from wrongful conviction in rape cases by:
Insisting on proof beyond reasonable doubt that the prosecutrix was not a consenting major.
Holding that consensual sex with a major prosecutrix is not rape.
Acquitting the accused where evidence establishes the above, safeguarding the rights of both victim and accused.
RELATED Blog
0 comments