Rape case can be rejected if prosecutrix's story is improbable: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court on Thursday held that even though convictions in rape cases can be based on the sole testimony of the prosecutrix, the case can be rejected if the story projected by the prosecutrix is found to be improbable [Ram Bax v State of NCT of Delhi]..Based on the above, single-judge Justice Chandra Dhari Singh set aside a 15-year-old conviction of a man who was charged with rape..“In case the court has reason not to accept the version of the prosecutrix on its face value, it may look for corroboration. In case the evidence is read in its totality and the story projected by the prosecutrix is found to be improbable, the prosecutrix's case becomes liable to be rejected,” the Court said.Justice Singh further held that it is settled law that unless there is an initial presumption of innocence of the accused, and unless the offence is established beyond reasonable doubt on the basis of legal evidence, one cannot be convicted for an offence.“It is not the duty of the defense to explain as to how and why in a rape case the victim and other witnesses have falsely implicated the accused. The prosecution case has to stand on its own legs and cannot take support from the weakness of the case of defense,” the judgment said..The judgment was delivered on a petition filed by one Ram Bax challenging a trial court order of July 2006 that convicted him under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code for the rape of a girl.The counsel appearing for Bax had told the Court that there were several material contradictions in the statement of the girl. The Court was told that several witnesses including the girl’s mother, her step-brother and the investigating officer (IO) were not even examined by the trial court. Therefore, there was no corroboration of her statement.The medical report showed no injury on the prosecutrix’s private parts while the semen found on her clothes did not match the accused, it was submitted. It was, therefore, argued that the man was falsely implicated in the case since he was against her relationship with a local boy of another faith..The Court held that it was crystal clear that the evidence when considered in totality, did not inspire confidence in the girl's deposition. It added that the prosecution had not disclosed the true genesis of the crime and therefore in such a situation, the appellant was entitled to a benefit of doubt.The Court, therefore, set aside the order and sentence of the man..While the appellant in the case was represented by advocate Anuj Kapoor of the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee, Additional Public Prosecutor Panna Lal Sharma appeared for the State..[Read Judgment]