UTPAL DAS & ANR. versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL

UTPAL DAS & ANR. versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL

Evidence of prosecutrix and PW-6 corroborated each other with no material contradictions. The absence of injuries on a grown up, married woman is not significant in rape cases. FIR and Section 164 Cr.P.C. statements are not substantive evidence unless attention is drawn in cross-examination. The plea of consensual sex was not sustainable, as no suggestion was made to the victim nor supported by evidence. Sexual assault and identification of accused were satisfactorily proved.

Parties
Appellant: Utpal Das; Appellant: Haradhan @ Bhalta Sutradar; Respondent: State of West Bengal
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
07 May 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Rape, Evidence, Benefit of Doubt, Appeal Against Acquittal
Criminal Law Rape Evidence Benefit of Doubt Appeal Against Acquittal

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Utpal Das

Appellant

Haradhan @ Bhalta Sutradar

Appellant

State of West Bengal

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conviction under Section 376/34 IPC is sustainable despite alleged contradictions and absence of injuries on the victim
  2. 2 Evidentiary value of FIR and Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement
  3. 3 Whether absence of injuries or medical evidence negates rape

Ratio Decidendi

Evidence of prosecutrix and PW-6 corroborated each other with no material contradictions. The absence of injuries on a grown up, married woman is not significant in rape cases. FIR and Section 164 Cr.P.C. statements are not substantive evidence unless attention is drawn in cross-examination. The plea of consensual sex was not sustainable, as no suggestion was made to the victim nor supported by evidence. Sexual assault and identification of accused were satisfactorily proved.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The conviction and sentence under Section 376/34 IPC are upheld.