Appellants got benefit of doubt in Rape case as prosecutrix developed her story; Medical not supporting; No injuries detected: High Court of Tripura

Indian Penal Code , 1860, S.376(2)(g)—Prosecutrix changed her story time and again had substantially deviated from her previous statement including her statement made under section 164(5), CrPC – Prosecutrix improved and exaggerated her statement during her examination-in-chief leaving enough space to doubt the credibility and integrity of the statement of the prosecutrix – Medical examination report not corroborating the fact of rape – Doctor stating that it was not possible for him to pass any comment whether the victim was raped or not – Prosecution failed to bring the SFSL report – Chain after the alleged incident missing and not complete – Appearances of the victim girl on her release from the clutches of the appellant not linked – No injuries detected when the prosecutrix was medically examined by the doctor after a short while of the incident – Appellants held to be entitled to the benefit of doubt – Conviction and sentence set aside – Appeal allowed.  

MADAN DEB VS. STATE OF TRIPURA