Source – indianexpress.com<\/p>\n
The Bombay High Court acquitted a man who had allegedly raped his neighbour when she had left her house to attend to nature\u2019s call in an open field. In 2014, the Sessions Court convicted the accused on circumstantial evidence, as the prosecution had failed to examine the woman. The accused was sentenced to eight years of imprisonment.<\/p>\n
Advocate Shantanu Phanse, appearing for the accused, told the court that the woman and her husband were not examined by the prosecution during the trial. Justice AM Badar noted that the prosecution\u2019s case rested on circumstantial evidence. Justice Badar observed that the main witness\u2019 statement \u201cis not sufficient to jump to the conclusion\u201d. The other two prosecution witnesses were police officers, who were patrolling the site and saw the mob near the woman\u2019s house.<\/p>\n
The doctor\u2019s report stated that there were 19 injuries on the woman\u2019s body but they were \u201csimple in nature\u201d. There was not a single injury on her private parts, the report stated. Justice Badar observed that the chain of circumstances was incomplete. The court also observed that the entire evidence of the prosecution, even if accepted, fails to establish charges against the accused.<\/p>\n