'Minor Injuries Alone Not Sufficient To Prove Lack Of Consent': Bombay High Court Sets Aside Rape Conviction U/S 376 IPC

The Bombay High Court has held that minor injuries or medical signs of sexual activity by themselves are insufficient to prove the absence of consent in cases of alleged rape. It was observed that when the prosecution fails to conclusively prove that the victim was a minor and the evidence shows material inconsistencies in her version, the benefit of the doubt must go to the accused.Justice Nivedita P. Mehta was hearing an appeal filed by Roshan Ruprao Bandre challenging his conviction and ten-year sentence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code imposed by the Additional Sessions Judge. The prosecution alleged that the appellant had kidnapped and raped a 17-year-old girl who had previously been his tenant.The Court noted that the prosecution failed to establish the victim's age conclusively. The alleged birth certificate produced by the prosecution was found unreliable, as it neither bore the victim's name nor matched the names of her parents. The school records also reflected conflicting dates of birth, thereby undermining the claim that the victim was a minor.Examining the evidence on consent, the Court found that the victim stayed with the accused for three to four days and made no attempt to raise an alarm or seek help. It also noted that the victim wore a mangalsutra and was introduced to others as the accused's wife during that period. The inconsistencies in her testimony, including newly introduced claims that she had been given some substance before the assault that made her semi-conscious, further weakened the prosecution's case.“… the testimony of the victim is riddled with material inconsistencies, omissions, and contradictions, which raise serious doubts about the veracity and reliability of her version… she remained in the company of the accused for three to four days, during which she did not make any attempt to escape or raise any alarm… The conduct of the victim, therefore, does not support the allegation of forcible sexual assault,” the Court observed.Regarding medical evidence, the Court observed that while minor abrasions and redness were found, the doctor had not opined that these were necessarily caused by forceful intercourse. The Court clarified that such minor injuries cannot alone establish non-consensual sex in the absence of corroborating evidence.“The medical evidence, though showing signs of recent sexual activity and minor injuries, does not conclusively prove forcible intercourse… Mere presence of abrasions or redness, without accompanying evidence of resistance or trauma, is not sufficient to conclusively prove the absence of consent,” the Court observed.The Court reiterated that where two interpretations are possible, the one favouring the accused must prevail; it noted that the possibility of a consensual relationship between the appellant and the victim cannot be ruled out. Holding that the essential ingredients of the offence under Section 376 IPC are not proved beyond a reasonable doubt, the Court set aside the conviction and acquitted the appellant.Case Title: Roshan v State of Maharashtra [CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 440 OF 2023]Click Here To Read/Download Order

'Minor Injuries Alone Not Sufficient To Prove Lack Of Consent': Bombay High Court Sets Aside Rape Conviction U/S 376 IPC

Saksham Vaishya

Tags