In villages, accused often complain that false rape case is filed because of land dispute- An illustration
Some years ago, I had heard a case where a person was convicted for rape.
At the end of his trial, when judge asked him what has he to say, he said there was land dispute between husband of woman and him. Husband has set up his wife into filing a false case on him.
Judge examined the case. The woman had filed complaint after 3 days. She was mother of two child. The medical examination could not bring out any evidence as the complaint was after 3 days.
She explained that for 3 days remained stunned and shocked. Thereafter she gathered courage to tell her husband. And then as per advice of husband, she filed complaint after 3 days.
There were no stains on clothes of woman. The woman told court that after rape, her clothes and legs were stained. So she came home and washed everything.
There was a slight injury on thigh of woman. She said this injury happened during rape.
Doctor was examined. Doctor said that injury was 3 days old. But in cross examination he admitted that it could be older than 3 days also. He cannot be sure.
When, accused was asked about all these evidence, he denied everything and said that there was land dispute between husband of woman and him and therefore, husband had set up his wife to file false case on him.
How Judges Think and Judge
The woman has told her story. It looked probable. Now to reject say of woman, judge has to have some reason to say that the woman is not telling truth.
No such reason was brought on record by accused. Accused merely said that there was some land dispute. But this was a bald statement, nothing concrete was produced. So there was no supporting evidence to support say of accused.
Judge convicted him. High Court confirmed conviction.
In Supreme Court, the lawyer of accused argued for three days to convince judges that this was a false case.
At his instance, Supreme Court judges again read each and every piece of evidence in case to find something that may make it probable that that woman may be lying.
(Normally, all evidence are not read in Supreme Court because it only has to see errors of law. But in some cases they go deeply in evidence to know truth)
The lawyer argued mainly on two counts 1) No stains on clothes of woman. 2) The Doctor's say that injury on thigh could have been older than 3 days.
Against the first point, the explanation given by woman that she washed away stains on leg and clothes after coming home, was probable.
The one wavering statement by Doctor that injury could have been older than 3 days, was not enough to disbelieve Evidence of woman.
No details of so called land dispute was shown to court.
The appeal was dismissed.
Point of The Case
To merely attack the evidence of woman is not enough. If accused says that case is false, he has to bring materials which can show that the woman is lying. Merely saying that woman is lying is not enough.
Haresh Raichura
28/6/13