Disapproving the hue and cry over acquittals in rape cases, a Delhi court has said the judiciary cannot be swayed by emotions or media reporting and it cannot convict a person in a rape case if witnesses turn hostile.
Additional Sessions Judge Nivedita Anil Sharma said the court has to confine itself to the ambit of law and the testimonies of witnesses.
"It would not be out of place to mention here that today there is public outrage and a hue and cry is being raised everywhere that courts are not convicting the rape accused. However, no man, accused of rape, can be convicted if the witnesses do not support the prosecution case or give quality evidence or where the prosecutrix is hostile, as in the present case. "It should not be ignored that the court has to confine itself to the ambit of law and the contents of the file as well as the testimonies of the witnesses and is not to be swayed by emotions or reporting in the media," the judge said.
The court made the remarks while acquitting a man of the charges of raping, molesting his sister-in-law and threatening to kill her son after the woman turned hostile. The court said that in view of deposition of the woman, who happened to be the material witness, it considered that the prosecution's case cannot be treated as "trustworthy and reliable".
"Consequently, no inference can be drawn that accused is guilty of raping the prosecutrix. There is no material on record to suggest that the prosecutrix was ever raped and threatened by the accused or that he outraged her modesty. No case is made out against the accused as there is no incriminating evidence against him," it said.
The court said the woman has deposed that the man has not committed any offence with her and sought his acquittal. According to the prosecution, on May 24, 2013, the man allegedly entered the woman's room in the midnight and raped her at knife point.
He again allegedly came to her room the next two nights and raped her and also threatened to kill her son if she disclosed his acts to anyone, it said adding he again raped her on October 20, 2012 and also outraged her modesty.
The woman, however, in her statement before the court said that the accused was her brother-in-law who was staying in her matrimonial house and after her husband left the house, some quarrels started between her and her in-laws, including the man.
On the advise of someone, she lodged a complaint against the accused and now she does not want to pursue the case, she deposed, adding that she has no grievance against the man and prayed for his acquittal.
"It is clear that the case of the prosecution is neither reliable nor believable and is not trustworthy and the prosecution has failed to establish the offence rape, threat and outraging the modesty of a woman.
"The evidence of the prosecutrix makes it highly improbable that such an incident ever took place," the court said.
"Therefore, the conscience of this court is completely satisfied that the prosecution has failed to bring home the charge against the accused due to complete lack of evidence for the offence under sections 376 (rape), 506 (criminal intimidation) and 354 (outraging modesty of a woman) of the IPC," the court said.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}