Jammu and Kashmir High Court acquits teacher convicted of rape, says conviction cannot stand merely on sentiment

A criminal conviction cannot stand merely on the basis of apprehensions and sentiments, observed the Jammu and Kashmir High Court recently while acquitting a teacher who had been accused of raping his student. [Mohd Maqbool Ganai V/s Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir].Justices Atul Sreedharan and Mohan Lal found that there was no legal evidence to prove that the teacher had committed the alleged rape.Among other factors, the Court found that there was an unexplained delay of 38 days in filing the case and that the medical evidence contradicted the complainant's version of events. ."It would be highly dangerous and hazardous to hold the appellant-convict guilty of offences alleged against against him on the basis of weak, shaky and unacceptable evidence," the Court concluded..By way of background, a government school teacher was accused by a class 8 student of raping her at his residence after school. She also alleged that the teacher threatened that she would not be allowed to take her exams if she disclosed the incident to anyone else. The alleged incident was said to have taken place in July 2015. However, the complaint was only made 38 days later, in August 2015.Such an unexplained inordinate delay in lodging the complaint led the High Court to doubt the prosecution's case. "If the prosecution fails to explain the delay, there is possibility of embellishments in the prosecution version on account of such delay which would be fatal to the prosecution making the prosecution case highly doubtful and concocted entitling the accused benefit of doubt leading to his acquittal", reads the judgment," the Court said. .Moreover, the medical exam conducted on the student in August indicated that she had a "freshly torn hymen", when could not have taken place 38 days ago, the Court was told. Another inconsistency noticed was in the complainant's testimony itself. While she alleged that the rape took place at 2 PM in the afternoon, she also mentioned that he had lunch with her family and friends on the same day at 2.30 PM. The Court opined that it was highly unlikely that she could have been raped by the accused between these times. "The critical appraisal of the deposition of prosecutrix leads us to the firm conclusion that the story projected by the prosecutrix is far from reality ... it is humanely impossible for one person to be present at two (2) places at the same time," the Court said. .The Court added that the complainant's version of events cannot be taken as the gospel truth and that without supporting evidence, the teacher's conviction cannot be sustained. Relying on the Supreme Court's judgment in Rahul v. State of Delhi, the Court further observed,"No conviction/ punishment can be rendered upon an accused merely on the ground of apprehension and influenced by sentiments. On merits, we find that the prosecution case has been found wanting, as no cogent, conclusive and creditworthy evidence has been led by the prosecution to prove the guilt of appellant/convict.".The Court, therefore, acquitted the teacher and set aside the trial court judgment which had earlier sentenced him to 20 years of imprisonment..Advocates Tahir Ahmad Bhat, Bhat Shafi, Abdul Wakeel Koka appeared on behalf of the teacher. Deputy Advocate General Mubeen Wani, along with advocate Ruheela Khan appeared on behalf of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir..[Read Judgment]