A Delhi Court acquitted a married man who was accused of raping a divorced woman. The court acquitted the many saying that "courts are not to be swayed by emotions" and one cannot be convicted if witnesses do not support the prosecution case.
"Today there is a public outrage and a hue and cry is being raised everywhere that courts are not convicting rape accused. However, no man can be convicted if the witnesses do not support the prosecution case or give quality evidence, as in the present case where the woman is hostile," Additional Sessions Judge Nivedita Anil Sharma said. The judge added that it should not be ignored that the "court has to confine itself to the ambit of law as well as testimonies of witnesses and is not to be swayed by emotions or reporting in the media".
The court absolved the Delhi resident of charges under sections 376 (rape) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of IPC after the woman resiled from her complaint alleging that he raped her on false promise of marriage. "As the prosecutrix, who is the star witness, has turned hostile and has not supported the prosecution case and more importantly has not assigned any criminal role to the accused the prosecution evidence is closed... The precious court time should not be wasted in recording the evidence of formal or official witnesses..." it said.
According to prosecution, the woman had lodged a complaint in 2012 alleging that the man, her live-in partner, was raping her since two years under the false promise of marrying her and also threatened her when she tried to convince him. After her first husband divorced her, the woman married again but this marriage too ran into rough weather.
The complainant had contended that her divorce proceedings with her second husband were pending and the man was also not happy with his wife, adding that they both met through a common friend and fell in love. However, she turned hostile in court saying the accused was innocent and they had consensual physical relations and could not get married due to pending divorce proceedings.
She deposed that she lodged the complaint due to misunderstanding and denied all the charges which she had levelled against the accused in the police station. During the trial, the accused had denied the allegations and claimed that he was falsely implicated.