Court Highlights Discrepancies Between Initial Attempt Allegation and Later Completed Rape Charge, Finds Medical Evidence Inconclusive, Sets Aside Conviction Under Sections 376, 450, and 506 RPC
In a significant judgment delivered on September 29, 2026, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court, Srinagar Bench, acquitted Mohammad Ashraf Ganie of charges relating to rape, house trespass, and criminal intimidation under Sections 376, 450, and 506 of the Ranbir Penal Code, Samvat 1989 (RPC). The judgment was pronounced by Justice Sanjay Parihar in appeal against the conviction and sentence awarded by the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Budgam.
The case originated from an alleged incident dated July 15, 2007, where the prosecutrix, an adopted daughter residing in Budgam, accused the appellant of forcibly entering her home, threatening her, and committing rape. The initial complaint, FIR, and statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. referred to an "attempt" to commit rape, and the case was initially registered under Sections 376/511 RPC. However, upon receipt of a medical opinion stating that sexual intercourse had occurred, the prosecution altered the charge to completed rape (Section 376 RPC) and added Sections 450 and 506 RPC.
The High Court undertook a meticulous reappraisal of the entire evidence, including oral testimonies and medical reports. It was noted that the prosecutrix's testimony, while uncorroborated, was generally consistent but had material variations from the earliest version of the complaint, especially concerning the nature of the offence-attempt versus completed rape. The medical evidence confirmed that the prosecutrix had experienced sexual intercourse but failed to establish the timing of the act, the identity of the perpetrator, or whether the act was consensual or forcible. The court also observed significant discrepancies regarding the timing of the medical examination and noted the absence of forensic evidence linking the appellant to the offence.
Furthermore, the appellant's plea of alibi, which claimed he was elsewhere at the time of occurrence, was not conclusively disproved, especially since the key alibi witness was never examined. Although the defense did not fully establish the alibi, the court emphasized that failure to prove an alibi does not automatically strengthen the prosecution's case.
The cumulative inconsistencies, including variations in witness statements about timing and circumstances, and the inability of the medical evidence to substantiate the prosecution's altered case from an attempt to a completed offence, led the Court to hold that the prosecution had failed to prove the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt.
The High Court accordingly set aside the conviction and sentence awarded to Mohammad Ashraf Ganie, acquitting him of all charges and ordering his immediate release from custody if not required in connection with any other case.
This judgment underscores the critical importance of consistent evidence and the limitations of medical opinion in sexual offence cases, especially when the timing and identity of the accused cannot be conclusively established. It also reaffirms the principle that the benefit of doubt must always go to the accused when the prosecution fails to meet the stringent standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Bottom Line:
Rape case - Where earliest version in complaint, FIR and statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. referred to only an attempt to commit rape, but prosecution case was later altered to completed rape solely on basis of medical opinion which could not establish time of intercourse or identity of offender, and cumulative inconsistencies created reasonable doubt, conviction under Sections 376, 450 and 506 RPC was set aside and accused acquitted by benefit of doubt.
Statutory provision(s):
Sections 376, 450, 506, 511 Ranbir Penal Code, Samvat 1989; Sections 161, 342, 374, 397A Code of Criminal Procedure, Samvat 1989
