In Brief
The Supreme Court acquitted the appellants of rape charges under IPC Section 376(2)(g), setting aside concurrent convictions by the trial court and High Court. The sole testimony of the victim-prosecutrix, though generally entitled to weight in sexual assault cases, lacked credibility and reliability. Medical evidence showed no seminal stains on the victim's garment and only a minor bruise, inconsistent with rape. Voice identification of the accused was unsafe as the victim had no prior acquaintance with them. The victim's own husband contradicted her account, and the alleged incident location was a busy marketplace, making it implausible that no one witnessed a forcible attack. The victim had a strong motive for revenge due to a business dispute and forest-produce theft allegations. The court found the prosecution's case built on suspicion and conjecture, not proof beyond reasonable doubt.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.