False Rape Case Over Personal Enmity? Allahabad High Court Acquits 3 Men After 43 Years, Finds Serious Doubts In Prosecution's Evidence

UTTAR PRADESH: The Allahabad High Court has acquitted three men convicted in a 1983 rape case, setting aside a trial court judgment after more than four decades. The Court found serious doubts in the prosecution's evidence, including a delayed FIR, contradictions in statements and medical findings that did not support important parts of the allegations.

Justice Avnish Saxena allowed the criminal appeal filed by 3 men, who were convicted on May 8, 1984, and sentenced to seven years of rigorous imprisonment and a Rs. 500 fine each.

Read Also:- How to defend a False rape cases in India

The case began on May 9, 1983, when a woman allegedly faced sexual assault at her residence. According to the prosecution, her husband returned after grazing goats, found the house locked from inside and reportedly saw the accused leaving the premises.

The husband lodged the FIR on May 14, 1983, five days after the alleged incident. The defence questioned this delay, arguing that the allegations arose from an earlier dispute over goats entering agricultural fields.

The Court examined the statements of the woman, her husband and other witnesses, along with the medical evidence. The woman was approximately seven months pregnant at the time of the alleged incident.

The medical examination recorded no external or internal injuries. The Court also noted that the alleged injuries from broken bangles were not supported by the medical report or the recovery of broken bangles.

The High Court found inconsistencies in the prosecution's account. Although the allegation concerned four persons, only three accused were named in the FIR. The Court also questioned the explanation for the delay in reporting such a serious allegation.

The Court considered the possibility of previous enmity between the parties, observing that hostility may provide a motive for committing an offence as well as for falsely implicating someone.

Read Also:-1998 Gang Rape Case | Guilt Not Established Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Supreme Court Sets Aside Conviction of 4 Men

The High Court relied on established Supreme Court principles on medical evidence, witness credibility and the benefit of doubt.

Finding that the prosecution had failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, the Court set aside the conviction under Section 376 IPC and acquitted all three appellants.

EXPLANATORY TABLE OF LAWS AND SECTIONS

CASE DETAILS

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• 43 Years Under a Rape Conviction: Three men spent over four decades fighting a conviction that the Allahabad High Court finally overturned.
• Delayed FIR, Shattered Reputations: A five-day FIR delay raised serious doubts, but the men faced decades of criminal proceedings.
• Contradictions Destroyed Prosecution's Case: Inconsistent statements and medical evidence raised reasonable doubt. Yet justice took 43 years.
• Personal Enmity, Possible False Implication: The Court considered previous hostility as a possible motive for false implication. Three men's lives remained under a criminal shadow.
• Acquitted After 43 Years, But Who Pays? Convictions overturned, but what about their lost reputation, dignity and decades of suffering? Acquittal is not compensation. 43 years of delayed justice demands accountability!