Allahabad High Court acquits rape accused who spent 21 years in jail; disapproves registry not listing appeal for 14 years

The Allahabad High Court recently acquitted a rape accused languishing in jail for more than 19 years (21 years with remission) noting that, jail authorities were under an obligation to consider his case for remission [Aftaf v State]..A bench of Justice Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker and Justice Ajai Tyagi expressed anguish about the State of Uttar Pradesh not following the decision of Supreme Court in Saudan Singh v State."His case has not been considered for remission by the jail authorities though 14 years of incarceration is over and there are directions of the Apex Court and this Court. Even if there is no direction of the Courts, under Section 433 of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) the authorities concerned are under an obligation to consider the case of the accused for remission," the Court said.Failure to consider the case of accused persons seems to be the natural administrative conduct of the officers and the jail authority, the judgment stated.Pertinently, the Court also disapproved of the failure by its own registry in listing the accused person's appeal for 14 long years after it was last heard in 2008. .By way of background, the accused was convicted in a rape case under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act) in the year 2003 and was sentenced to imprisonment for life.The Court noted that, the present appeal was moved before the High Court in 2004, however, as per the order sheet, the matter was listed only after few years and the delay came to be condoned in the year 2008..Further, from 2008 till 2022, the case was not listed at all.Taking note of the same, the Court, berated the registry for failing to list the appeal for 14 years (2008 to 2022) and directed registry to follow the decision in Vishnu v State of UP. "Office has not prepared the paper book in this matter though the record was very much there in the year 2004. We, by this omnibus direction, direct Registrar (Listing) to impress upon the officer concerned to follow the decision of this Court in Vishnu (Supra) which are yet not being followed as even after 2021, the matters are not being listed. Even this matter has been listed only after the counsel for the appellant has filed listing application as the accused is in jail for more than 19 years (21 years with remission)," noted the Court..It then proceeded to acquit the accused noting that the medical evidence did not support the case. "The evidence of doctor and the medical report does not show presence of any spermatozoa though the prosecutrix after lodging of F.I.R. was directly taken from police station for medical examination. No injury was found on her private part...The learned judge, unfortunately, no where has discussed about the ingredients of Section 375 of IPC.".The High Court said that the trial court had not taken into consideration the ingredients necessary to constitute the offence of rape under IPC."The important aspects are non founding of spermatozoa and non finding of any kind of injuries which would permit us to upturn the judgment of learned Sessions Judge. There is no finding as far as commission of offence under Section 3 (2) (v) of SC/ST Act. Only on the ground that the prosecutrix and her family members belong to a particular community, can it be said that the offence has been committed? The answer is, No," the Court said while acquitting the man.Advocate Rakesh Dubey represented accused/appellant, while State was represented by Advocate Vikas Goswami..[Read Judgment].Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.