SUSHIL KUMAR TIWARI versus HARE RAM SAH & ORS.

SUSHIL KUMAR TIWARI versus HARE RAM SAH & ORS.

The High Court's acquittal was set aside because the Trial Court's conviction was supported by a fairly consistent and corroborated prosecutorial case: the victim was shown to be a minor (12-15 years) by unrebutted oral and documentary evidence, medical records corroborated pregnancy and abortion and the time-frame, defects in framing of charge (wrong date) and non-compliance with Section 223 Cr.P.C. did not occasion any failure of justice or prejudice to the accused; accordingly the Trial Court's conviction and sentence were restored.

Parties
Appellant: Sushil Kumar Tiwari; Respondent: Hare Ram Sah; Respondent: Manish Tiwari
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
01 September 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court; Judgment Disposing the Appeal (appeal Disposed)
Outcome
Impugned judgment of High Court set aside; judgment and sentence of Trial Court restored; appeal disposed of
Legal Topics
Rape, Framing of Charge, Section 223 Cr.p.c. (joinder of Trials), Evidence Appreciation, Standard of Reasonable Doubt, Age of Victim, Delay in Lodging FIR, Pregnancy and Abortion, Joinder/misjoinder of Charges
Criminal Law Evidence Criminal Procedure Child Protection Law Rape Framing of Charge Section 223 Cr.p.c. (joinder of Trials) Evidence Appreciation +5 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sushil Kumar Tiwari

Appellant

Hare Ram Sah

Respondent

Manish Tiwari

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court; Judgment Disposing the Appeal (appeal Disposed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court erred in acquitting the respondents by holding that the prosecution failed to discharge its evidentiary burden due to inconsistencies and contradictions in the evidence
  2. 2 Whether the High Court erred in finding that the trial was carried out in violation of Section 223 Cr.P.C. and that non-adherence caused prejudice leading to miscarriage of justice

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court's acquittal was set aside because the Trial Court's conviction was supported by a fairly consistent and corroborated prosecutorial case: the victim was shown to be a minor (12-15 years) by unrebutted oral and documentary evidence, medical records corroborated pregnancy and abortion and the time-frame, defects in framing of charge (wrong date) and non-compliance with Section 223 Cr.P.C. did not occasion any failure of justice or prejudice to the accused; accordingly the Trial Court's conviction and sentence were restored.

Court Disposition

Impugned judgment of High Court set aside; judgment and sentence of Trial Court restored; appeal disposed of

Orders

  • Judgment and sentence of the Trial Court restored both on conviction and sentence
  • Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 shall surrender before the trial court within two weeks from date of judgment