NDLI: Parkash Chand Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	ss. 376 and 506 FIR after 7 months IPC Rape extra-judicial confession
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860)
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Allowed
Headnote	Penal Code, 1860 – ss. 376 and 506 – Rape – PW.2-prosecutrix alleged that appellant caught hold of her on a common path of villages and dragged her in the bushes – She raised hue and cry but nobody was there at the place of occurrence – Appellant committed rape on her – Consequent to which, prosecutrix got pregnant – After 7 months of alleged commission of offence, FIR was lodged – Trial Court convicted appellant u/ss. 376 and 506 IPC – Conviction affirmed by the High Court – On appeal, held:High Court proceeded on the basis of testimony of prosecutrix and extra- judicial confession made before PW.4 and PW.5 – There were different versions of PW.3 and PW.4 about the disclosure of the incident to them by the prosecutrix – PW.4 evidence was based on prosecutrix going to him and revealing him about the incident whereas, PW.3 stated that after prosecutrix told her about the alleged rape, PW.3 disclosed the factum of alleged rape to PW.4 – And,prosecutrix stated that incident was disclosed by PW.3 to PW.4 –This falsified the version of PW.4 – In such circumstances, not safe to draw support from alleged extra-judicial confession made by appellant to PW.4 – PW.5 too gave contradictory version of facts regarding appellant coming to him and requesting compromise with prosecutrix – Insofar as prosecutrix is concenred, if she had raised hue and cry, it was very unlikely that the labourers who used the common path did not hear it – Thus, unsafe to convict appellant on testimony of the prosecutrix – Appellant entitled to the benefit of doubt.Evidence – Critical examination of evidence in an appeal by special leave – Held: This Court has indulged in a closer look at the evidence in these proceedings having regard to the need to doso in view of the fact that the complaint itself is lodged after 7 months – If the evidence adduced by the prosecution falls short of the test of reliability and acceptability and as such it is highly unreliable to act upon it even in an appeal by special leave, such a critical examination may not be unwarranted.Delay/ Laches – Offence of Rape – Delay of 7 months in lodging the FIR – Held: There is admittedly a delay of 7 months in lodging the FIR in the case of alleged rape – If the case is reported immediately apart from the inherent strength of the case flowing from genuineness attributable to such promptitude, the perceptible advantage would be the medical examination to which the prosecutrix can be subjected and the result of such examination in a case where there is a resistance – It is the case of the prosecution that she raised hue and cry and therefore apparently she would have resisted – Possibly, a medical examination may have revealed signs of any resistance or injuries.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.M. Joseph
Neutral Citation	2019 INSC 182
Petitioner	Parkash Chand
Respondent	State Of Himachal Pradesh
SCR	[2019] 3 S.C.R. 953
Judgement Date	2019-02-12
Case Number	2393

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Parkash Chand Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh

Please Log-in to view this content

Ram Lal Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh

State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Prem Singh

State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Gian Chand

State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Asha Ram

Prithi Chand Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh

Indrajit Das Vs. The State of Tripura

State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Kanda Gopaludu

State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Shree Kant Shekari

Anurag Soni Vs. State of Chhattisgarh

Parkash Chand Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh

Parkash Chand Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Ram Lal Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh

State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Prem Singh

State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Gian Chand

State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Asha Ram

Prithi Chand Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh

Indrajit Das Vs. The State of Tripura

State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Kanda Gopaludu

State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Shree Kant Shekari

Anurag Soni Vs. State of Chhattisgarh

Parkash Chand Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh