In Brief
The appellant was convicted of rape under Section 376 IPC and sentenced to seven years' imprisonment, with the conviction upheld by the High Court. The Supreme Court acquitted him, finding that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. Key deficiencies included: no medical examination of the complainant after the alleged incident, no doctor examined at trial, the complainant's documented history of making false complaints against others, undisputed enmity between the appellant and the complainant's husband, the complainant's pattern of implicating enemies with wild allegations, absence of eyewitnesses, and weak testimony from a chance witness. The Court held that such gaps rendered the prosecution's evidence insufficient to sustain a conviction.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.