Read Time: 12 minutes

Synopsis

The Supreme Court on April 23, 2025, upheld the Himachal Pradesh High Court's 2015 order which set aside the conviction of a man and a co-accused in a 2012 case related to rape of a minor girl, in view of material contradiction in her statement as to the date of commission of the offence.

A bench of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Prashant Kumar Mishra dismissed the appeals filed by the Himachal Pradesh government against the acquittal of Sanjay Kumar and co-accused Chaman Shukla, holding the view taken by the high court was a plausible one.

The court also considered the evidence on record, to hold that no interference against the judgment of acquittal was called for.

According to the prosecution, Sanjay Kumar, known to the girl, kidnapped her in his car on March 30, 2012. He spent the night in the house of one Jawala Devi at village Thaila Chakti, Tehsil Rampur, District Shimla where he allegedly committed rape on her. 

On the next day, the girl was kept in the house of accused Chaman, who threatened her to state that she came to Rampur of her own volition and further tried to mislead the investigating agency. The investigating officer procured a certificate wherein the girl's date of birth was recorded as December 09, 1997. On April 11, 2012, she was produced before the Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur where her statement under Section 164 CrPC was recorded.

The trial court convicted accused Sanjay Kumar and sentenced him to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs 20,000 and accused Chaman to undergo simple imprisonment for one year. Both the accused preferred appeals before the high court, which set aside the conviction and sentence.

After hearing the counsel for the state and the accused, the bench noted, in the impugned judgment rendered by the high court, after an elaborate discussion of the evidence on record, it was held that the prosecution had failed to establish the charges against the accused-respondents.

The high court observed that as per the girl, the accused Sanjay took her to Rampur in the house of Jawala Devi on March 30, 2012 and during night he committed rape. The next evening Sanjay took her to the house of co-accused Chaman and had left her there and on the third day i.e. April 01, 2012, some people including co-accused Lekh Ram from her village came to the house of Chaman and took her to the Police Station, Rampur where she made a statement that she ran away from her house because her parents used to beat her.

In cross-examination, the girl admitted that she did not disclose anything to Jawala Devi or her family members or even thereafter did not disclose anything to Chaman and his family members, though she spent one night there. 

She admitted that she had not disclosed that Sanjay committed rape with her. Throughout her journey from Bilaspur to Rampur she did not inform anyone that Sanjay had kidnapped her. She categorically admitted that Sanjay committed rape with her at Thali Chakti and not at the house of the co-accused Chaman and that the rape was committed in the night of March 30, 2012, in the house of Jawala Devi and on March 31, 2012 she stayed in the house of accused Chaman and no rape was committed with her on that date as accused Sanjay was not there.

The high court found that the best evidence about the presence of accused Sanjay at Rampur was that of Jawala Devi, as rape was committed at her residence. However, Jawala Devi had not supported the prosecution nor had any other witness who accompanied the accused Lekh Ram been examined.               

However, the high court also noted, in her statement, the girl had never disclosed that rape was committed upon her at Rampur. 

The high court found that there was no evidence as to the relation between accused Sanjay and Jawala Devi. In respect of the medical evidence, the high court opined that the possibility of rape could not be ruled out, but the question remained as to who committed the rape and moreover, the DNA profile of the semen found over the underwear of the girl had not been done. It also found, as per evidence, that accused Sanjay alone committed rape as there was no charge to that effect against co-accused Chaman. However, accused Chaman was never informed by the girl about the commission of rape.

The apex court also noted since the FIR was lodged regarding the abduction of the girl, there was no allegation of rape in the FIR. 

In her statement under Section 164 CrPC, the girl stated that the rape was committed in the night of March 31, 2012 when she was in the house of accused Chaman. However, in her court’s statement she stated that rape was committed by accused Sanjay in the night of March 30, 2012 when they were staying in the house of Jawala Devi. She admitted of not disclosing the fact of commission of rape to anyone in the village Rampur or to the villagers or accused Chaman who brought her to the Police Station, Rampur.

"In view of the statement on record, we are of the view that there is material contradiction in the statement of the girl as to the date of commission of rape and since accused Sanjay was not with the girl in the night of March 31, 2012 when she was in the house of co-accused Chaman and there is no allegation of rape against accused Chaman in whose house she stayed on the next night, the High Court has rightly concluded that the commission of rape by accused Sanjay is not proved," the bench said, dismissing both the appeals.

Case Title: State of Himachal Pradesh Vs Sanjay Kumar and connected matter