The apex court further took into consideration the fact that the victim's own son and a relative had turned hostile and her husband too did not testify during the trial.
Disbelieving the prosecutions' version that the accused also suffered injuries while raping the victim who was much older than him, the Supreme Court has acquitted a man who was sentenced to 10 years imprisonment for raping a housewife.
The apex court further took into consideration the fact that the victim's own son and a relative had turned hostile and her husband too did not testify during the trial.
"We find that this case is rather an unusual one. The fact that the appellant was in the house of the prosecutrix is admitted on both sides. The prosecution story that the appellant (Dinesh Jaiswal), a young man of 31 years, had been overpowered by a much older woman is rather difficult to believe.
"In any case, as the investigating officer had not verified the statement of the appellant, some corroboration for the prosecutrix's story was required. As already mentioned, her son Babulal and Shivbalak, a relative, who had reached the place of incident, were both declared hostile and did not support the prosecutrix," a bench of justices HS Bedi and justice JM Panchal said in its acquittal order.
The prosecution said both Jaiswal and the 42-year old victim had both suffered injuries during the scuffle. It was claimed that while Jaiswal attacked her thrice on her body while committing the rape, the victim retaliated thereafter, by inflicting six injuries on him.
A sessions court in Madhya Pradesh had convicted Dinesh Jaiswal for raping the housewife on July 8, 1987, and sentenced him to 10 years RI. The Madhya Pradesh High Court upheld the sentence following which he appealed in the apex court.
However, the apex court was not convinced with the prosecution's argument and pointed out the various infirmities.
The apex court took into consideration the report of Dr Kalpana Ravi, a prosecution witness who found three injuries on her and further recorded that as she was a married woman of 42 years, that it had not been possible to give a categorical opinion about any recent sexual encounter.
Jaiswal was also examined by Dr SB Khare, another prosecution witness, who in his report revealed six injuries, several of them on the head.
The claim of the defence was that he was falsely implicated as he had gone to the woman's house to recover his lost cow, over which a quarrel ensued.
"We find that even her husband Sampat who had accompanied her to the police station to lodge the report did not come into the witness box and the doctor was also unnable to confirm the factum of rape evidence of the prosecutrix.
){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}