2019 (11) TMI 1841 - SC - Indian Laws

Conviction of Accused for offences Under Section 354 and Section 511 read with Section 376 Indian Penal Code - attempt to rape - HELD THAT - In the present case, the statement rendered by the complainant-victim (P.W. 1) is corroborated by the daughter of the complainant-victim (P.W. 2) who is an eye-witness to the said incident, husband of the complainant-victim (P.W. 3) and independent witness Sohan Lal (P.W. 4). The courts below have observed that although these witnesses were subjected to lengthy cross-examination, they have remained persistent in their statements and there was no material contradiction so as to raise any doubt regarding their credibility. In the case at hand, prior to the commission of the offence, the Accused-Appellant had attempted to molest the complainant-victim on the same day itself. Later that night, the Accused-Appellant forcibly entered the house of the complainant-victim in a drunken state, being aware about the absence of her husband. Thereafter, the Accused-Appellant, exerting criminal force, pounced upon the complainant-victim and forcibly lifted her petticoat. Although, the complainant-victim pleaded the Accused to stop considering the fact that she was his aunt; he responded stating, it does not matter to him. The aforesaid action of the Accused-Appellant is sufficient to prove his culpability. Herein, although the complainant-victim and her daughter were pleading with the Accused to let the complainant-victim go, the Accused-Appellant did not show any reluctance that he was going to stop from committing the aforesaid offence. Therefore, had there been no intervention, the Accused-Appellant would have succeeded in executing his criminal design. The conduct of the Accused in the present case is indicative of his definite intention to commit the said offence. Further, the plea of the Accused-Appellant regarding the delay in registering the FIR has been duly considered by both the courts below. It has been duly noted that the husband of the complainant-victim (P.W. 3) was staying in Nandprayag while the incident occurred in the remote village of Salna. Subsequent to the incident, the complainant-victim first travelled to meet her husband (P.W. 3). After narrating the said incident to him, she further travelled to register a complaint before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chamoli, which is again far off from the place of occurrence. Considering the aforesaid factual scenario, the delay in registering the FIR does not affect the case of the prosecution adversely. Considering the facts and circumstances, the guilt of the Accused-Appellant has been established beyond doubt. In our opinion, therefore, the courts below have rightly convicted and sentenced the Accused - Appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Conviction under Sections 354 and 511 read with Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Delay in registering the FIR.
3. Credibility of witnesses and evidence.

Analysis:

Conviction under Sections 354 and 511 read with Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code:
The case involved the Accused-Appellant being convicted for offences under Section 354 and Section 511 read with Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. The Accused-Appellant attempted to molest the complainant-victim, his aunt, and later forcibly entered her house, attempting to rape her. The courts found the evidence provided by the complainant-victim, her daughter, husband, and an independent witness to be consistent and credible. The Accused-Appellant's actions clearly demonstrated his intention to outrage the modesty of the victim, leading to his conviction under the relevant sections.

Delay in registering the FIR:
The Accused-Appellant argued that there was a delay of 3 days in registering the FIR, which raised doubts about the prosecution's case. However, it was explained that the delay occurred because the incident took place in a remote village, and the victim had to travel to meet her husband before filing the complaint. Both lower courts considered this explanation and concluded that the delay did not impact the credibility of the prosecution's case.

Credibility of witnesses and evidence:
The witnesses, including the victim, her daughter, husband, and an independent witness, provided consistent testimonies that were corroborated by each other. Despite lengthy cross-examinations, their statements remained steadfast, without any material contradictions. The courts found their evidence to be reliable and sufficient to establish the guilt of the Accused-Appellant beyond a reasonable doubt. The Accused-Appellant's defense claiming enmity and lack of overt acts for the offence under Section 511 read with Section 376 was dismissed based on the evidence presented.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court upheld the lower courts' decision, affirming the conviction and sentencing of the Accused-Appellant under the relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code. The appeal lacked merit, as the evidence and testimonies presented by the prosecution were found to be credible and sufficient to establish the guilt of the Accused-Appellant.