Surat Rape Case | 'Contradictions In Victim's Testimony': Narayan Sai Tells Gujarat High Court In Plea Challenging Conviction, Life Term

While arguing his plea challenging his 2019 rape conviction and life sentence, Narayan Sai told the Gujarat High Court on Tuesday (March 17) that there were several contradictions, revisions and improvements in the testimony of the prosecutrix which had not been looked at by the trial court. Victim had chance to report but did notA division bench of Justice Ilesh J Vora and Justice RT Vachchani was hearing Narayan Sai's appeal who was convicted by a Sessions Court in Surat for rape of a woman and sentenced to life imprisonment. "As per her case she was back to Surat, she was in her comfort zone in her home. She does not report this incident to anyone. By that time she was subjected to such act once. Inspite of that her case is that applicant calls her and asks her to come to the ashram in Surat and she immediately goes to the ashram. Any female who is subjected to such torture would ever go on one call of a person who has treated her like this? Even after sexual exploitation she goes to another ashram where is posted as sanchalika,..there she alleges that third incident has taken place...She was not confined within 4 walls of ashram. She herself states that she to visit office of collector for work of ashram. She had the chance to report to the police, family but nothing of that sort takes place," the petitioner's counsel said. The counsel said that there was no ring of truth in prosecutrix's evidence and she cannot be considered as witness of sterling quality. She further said that there were certain interested witnesses who had no personal knowledge of the offence alleged, adding that there were further lapses in the investigation which was conducted in a manner only to help and aid the prosecutuion. She also said that not a single independent witness had been examined by prosecution.The counsel further said, "It is clearly coming out that after 2004 she had left ashram and was not concerned. What prevented her from not filing the complaint even after 5 months 6 months of leaving ashram when she was safe? Her attending several programs in 2012, 2013, everything shows she was married was settled. Even after her marriage she does not raise her voice immediately. Overall situation, evidence which has come on record clearly suggests that she is a courageous woman. Any woman who is subjected to horrendous incidents would not even like to see face of that man".Contradictions, improvements, discrepancies The counsel said that as per case of prosecution, 6 girls were accompanying the prosecutrix however prosecution has dropped all the material witnesses inspite of fact that Section 161 CrPC statements were recorded.The counsel submitted that the trial court without independently evaluating the evidence of prosecutrix and other prosecution witnesses had dealt with defences raised by accused one by one and had negativated all the defences. Without appreciating whether prosecution has proved case beyond reasonable doubt or not the trial court passed the conviction order based on sole testimony of victim, the counsel added."There are contradictions, improvements, discrepancies in various versions in FIR as well as her statement in Section 164 CrPC. As well as in her evidence which was given before the hon'ble court...her credibility is impeached by her own evidence the court below refuses to deal with the same...believes whatever has been stated by prosecutrix as gospel truth which has resulted in serious prejudice to applicant...," the counsel said.She further referred to a chart to argue that there were incongruencies in version of prosecutrix in FIR, her evidence before the court vis-a-vis evidence of defence witness. As per the prosecution, the prosecutrix and her family had participated in a program organized in December, 2001 at Asaram's ashram in Surat. It was alleged that on the last day of the program the applicant–son of Asharam, asked the prosecutrix to visit a town in Madhya Pradesh since an ashram was to be built there and the prosecutrix along with the other devotees went to the place.Thereafter the victim was asked to go to another place in Bihar to help for construction of an ashram there and accordingly she along with the other devotees went there. It was alleged that applicant on the first day of satsang summoned the prosecutrix in his kutir of the Aashram where he sexually molested her. The prosecutrix had also alleged that she travelled to various cities from Bihar at the instance of the applicant and returned to Surat. Thereafter, she alleged that she was asked to visit the applicant in the Surat ashram where she was forced to indulge into the act of unnatural sex with the applicant, was also raped by him.It was alleged that she had left the ashram in 2004 but she had no courage to report the incidents. However, after Asaram was apprehended in connection with an FIR registered at Jodhpur and after rejection of his bail application by Rajasthan High Court, the prosecutrix mustered the courage...

Surat Rape Case | 'Contradictions In Victim's Testimony': Narayan Sai Tells Gujarat High Court In Plea Challenging Conviction, Life Term

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags