1 Aug 2023 11:29 AM GMT
The Orissa High Court recently acquitted a man accused of committing rape on his sister-in-law observing that she being a grown-up lady, having experience of sexual intercourse, failed to offer resistance to the alleged forceful act.While giving relief to the accused-appellant, the Single Judge Bench of Justice Sangam Kumar Sahoo said,“If the victim, who is a grown up lady and having...
The Orissa High Court recently acquitted a man accused of committing rape on his sister-in-law observing that she being a grown-up lady, having experience of sexual intercourse, failed to offer resistance to the alleged forceful act.
While giving relief to the accused-appellant, the Single Judge Bench of Justice Sangam Kumar Sahoo said,
“If the victim, who is a grown up lady and having experience of sex, fails to offer sufficient resistance to the accused who was attempting to have sex with her single-handedly, the Court may find that there was no force or the said act was not against her will.”
The victim lodged an FIR alleging that during the evening hours of 16.03.2014, while she was returning to her house through a jungle, the appellant met her and forced her for sexual intercourse.
As the victim did not return to the house even after the sunset, her husband went in search of her and found her in a compromising position with the appellant in the jungle. Seeing her husband, the victim kicked the appellant as a consequence of which he fled away from the spot.
Upon registering the FIR, the police investigated the matter and filed charge-sheet. The trial Court held the appellant guilty of the offence under section 376(2)(f) of the IPC. Being aggrieved by the said order of conviction and sentence, the appellant approached the High Court.
The Court noted that the doctor, who medically examined the victim a day after the occurrence, stated that there was no bodily injury present on the victim and there was no sign and symptom of recent sexual intercourse and there was no evidence of bleeding injuries.
The Court further underlined that the victim stated in her evidence that at the time of rape, her blouse got torn and bangles got broken but the seizure list of the wearing apparels of the victim does not indicate anything to that respect.
It also took into consideration the fact that the spot visit report did not indicate any incriminating thing at the spot. Therefore, it held, the evidence of the victim that there was protest from her side and the appellant committed sexual intercourse by tearing her blouse is not acceptable.
Further, the medical examination report of the victim indicated that the blood group of the victim was ‘O-ve'. Similarly, the medical examination report of the appellant revealed that the blood group of the appellant was ‘A+ve’.
“…the chemical examiner in his report vide Ext.10 indicates that human semen stain of group ’B’ was found on the green colour saya of the victim. Therefore, the learned trial Court has rightly held in the impugned judgment that the human semen stain of group ‘B’ on the saya of the victim did not belong to the appellant,” the Court held.
Having regard for the medical examination report of the victim, the Court was of the view that she did not protest or resist to the act committed by the appellant.
“Being a married lady and accustomed to sexual intercourse, if the act was without her consent, she could have protested or resisted and in that event, not only there would have been some injuries on the body of the appellant but also on her own body as well, since it was alleged to be a forcible intercourse,” the Court added.
Accordingly, the Court concluded that the alleged sexual intercourse happened with the consent of the victim and only because the said act was witnessed by her husband, she put the blame on the appellant to “save her own skin”.
Consequently, the appeal was allowed setting aside the order of conviction and sentence.
Case Title: Sanu Munda v. State of Odisha
Case No: JCRLA No. 20 of 2021
Date of Judgment: July 19, 2023
Counsel for the Appellant: Mr. Chandan Samantaray, Advocate
Counsel for the State: Mr. Manoranjan Mishra, Addl. Standing Counsel
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ori) 83
Click Here To Read/Download Judgment