Madan v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
High Court allowed appeals against rape convictions, setting aside trial court judgment due to uncorroborated victim testimony, unexplained FIR delay, lack of medical injuries, missing material evidence, and inconclusive SC/ST Act grounds.
What did the court decide?
Appellants acquitted of charges under IPC and SC/ST Act; discharge ordered; bail bond with sureties furnished for re-arrest.
What the court decided
A.F.R
Reserved On: 15.02.2023
Delivered On: 06.07.2023
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:43512
Court No. -29
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 28 of 1998
Appellant :- Madan Respondent :- State of U.P. Counsel for Appellant :- R.Murtaza,Aishwarya Mishra,Alok Singh,Md.Altaf Mansoor,Prince Lenin,Rishad Murtaza,Shamim Khan,Syed Ali Jafar Rizvi
Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate,Shadab Waheed
And
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 726 of 1997
Appellant :- Bhaggu @ Masum Ali Respondent :- State of U.P. Counsel for Appellant :- R.Murtaza Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether conviction under Section 376 IPC based on uncorroborated testimony of prosecutrix with unexplained delay in FIR and lack of medical evidence is sustainable?
Whether the trial court erred in convicting appellants under the SC/ST Act due to absence of evidence regarding caste-based motivation?
Whether reasonable doubt arising from inconsistencies in prosecution evidence necessitates acquittal?
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Madan
- appellant
Maksood Ali
- appellant
Munna
- appellant
Bhaggu @ Masum Ali
- respondent
State of U.P.
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · July
- Registered
- Case no.
- CRLA/28/1998
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court