A criminal appeal against conviction and sentence for rape. The High Court upheld the trial court's finding of guilty based on corroboration from witnesses and medical/saps evidence, rejecting the argument that assaulting an elderly woman was improbable.
Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence upheld.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1 Appeal 45/2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
Criminal Appeal No.45 of 2014
Uja @ Ajay @ Vijay Murlidhar Dalvi Age 31 years, Occupation : Driver, R/o Gunwadi, Taluka and District Ahmednagar. .. Appellant.
Versus
The State of Maharashtra. .. Respondent.
Shri. S.H. Jagiasi, Advocate, appointed for appellant.
Shri. S.K. Tambe, Additional Public Prosecutor, for respondent.
CORAM: T.V. NALAWADE, J.
Date on which judgment reserved : 27th November 2014 Date on which judgment pronounced: 10th December 2014
JUDGMENT :
2 Appeal 45/2014
of 7 years is given by the trial Court. Both the sides are heard.
3 Appeal 45/2014
4 Appeal 45/2014
5 Appeal 45/2014
prosecutrix to falsely implicate him in the case.
direct and circumstantial evidence. The evidence of
prosecutrix (PW 1) is as per the version given by her to police in the F.I.R. The version on the incident of rape is materially consistent with the contents of the F.I.R. and the F.I.R. gives necessary corroboration to the version of the prosecutrix.
6 Appeal 45/2014
7 Appeal 45/2014
there was virtually no reason for her to falsely implicate the accused. In such a case conviction can be based only on the evidence of the prosecutrix also. However, in the present case there are many circumstances which give corroboration to the version the prosecutrix.
8 Appeal 45/2014
Dr. to create other probability. Though vaginal swab and pubic hair were collected by the doctor, the CA report in this regard is in negative. The medical evidence is consistent with the version of the prosecutrix and it has given corroboration to the version of the prosecutrix.
9 Appeal 45/2014
these ladies and other witnesses to make her dress properly. Her evidence shows that the prosecutrix narrated the incident to her and also to other ladies like Hausabai.
10 Appeal 45/2014
such injury can be caused if stone is hit. This evidence shows that something did happen on that night. There is no reason to disbelieve this witness in respect of the version that she had rushed to the house of the prosecutrix on that night after hearing shouts of the prosecutrix and the prosecutrix had narrated the incident to her. Her evidence shows that there was immediate disclosure made by the prosecutrix to the neighbours.
11 Appeal 45/2014
against the accused and he has given false evidence. There is no reason to disbelieve Saraswati (PW 3) and Walmik (PW 7).
12 Appeal 45/2014
articles are identified. There is nothing brought on record during cross examination of PW 4 and PW 5 to create doubt about their versions. The clothes of the accused were seized on 7-10-2008 and that panchanama is admitted by the defence.
13 Appeal 45/2014
charge was framed against the accused. No probability of false implication is shown. There was no reason whatsoever for the prosecutrix and other witnesses to falsely implicate the accused. There is possibility that as the accused was drunk, he was not within control of himself and he did the act against the prosecutrix as she was alone in her house at the relevant time. Learned counsel for the accused submitted that it does not look probable that the accused would commit such act on a old lady of 65 years when she was paralyzed in left limbs. This submission is not acceptable. Nobody can make guess about human mind, the urges he is having and his self control.
14 Appeal 45/2014
sees no reason to interfere in the decision of conviction. Minimum possible sentence is given by the trial Court so on the point of quantum of penalty also there is no possibility of interference.
Sd/- (T.V. NALAWADE, J. )
rsl
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the evidence is sufficient to sustain the conviction for rape given the appellant's submission that it is improbable for him to assault an elderly, paralyzed woman.
Whether the High Court should interfere with the minimum sentence awarded by the trial court.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Uja @ Ajay @ Vijay Murlidhar Dalvi
The State of Maharashtra
T.V. NALAWADE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
