Allahabad High Court: “Undressing A Woman To Commit Rape Is Attempt To Rape”
Allahabad Excessive Court docket dominated that forcibly undressing a lady with intent to rape is a transparent try and rape beneath IPC. The Court docket confirmed a 10-year sentence for the accused in a 2004 kidnapping and assault case.
Thanks for studying this put up, remember to subscribe!
UTTAR PRADESH: The Allahabad Excessive Court docket clearly stated that if a person forcibly undresses a lady to rape her, it will likely be thought of an “try and rape” beneath Part 511 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), even when the precise rape didn’t occur.
This case goes again to the 12 months 2004. A person named Pradeep Kumar forcefully kidnapped a lady. He took her in a Maruti van and stored her locked in a home belonging to his relative for round 20 days. Throughout that point, he tried to rape her by taking off her garments. However the girl resisted him strongly and he couldn’t full the act of rape.
The trial courtroom had already discovered Pradeep Kumar responsible and punished him with 10 years of imprisonment. When he challenged this punishment, Justice Rajnish Kumar of the Allahabad Excessive Court docket confirmed the trial courtroom’s resolution and didn’t give him any aid.
The prosecution informed the courtroom that Pradeep Kumar had kidnapped the sufferer and stored her hidden for a lot of days. Throughout this time, he tried to sexually assault her by undressing her. However the girl fought again bravely and stopped him from raping her.
The Excessive Court docket noticed:
“He with the stated motive stored her on the residence of his relative for about 20 days, the place he not solely outraged the modesty of the sufferer but in addition tried rape by undressing her. Nevertheless, he couldn’t commit intercourse on account of her protest. The sufferer has acknowledged that the appellant had performed unhealthy work together with her. The sufferer reiterated and supported the assertion given beneath Part 164 CrPC earlier than the Justice of the Peace in her proof throughout trial additionally.”
The Court docket referred to earlier Supreme Court docket selections, which say that eradicating the garments of a lady to rape her is itself an try and rape, even when the act will not be accomplished.
The accused, Pradeep Kumar, tried to defend himself by saying that the sufferer filed the criticism very late, so it shouldn’t be believed. However the Excessive Court docket stated that the delay was correctly defined, and it doesn’t make the case weak.
He additionally stated that he was being falsely accused due to private enmity. However the Court docket didn’t agree. The Court docket stated that he couldn’t show any form of enmity with the sufferer or her household.
“The appellant additionally tried to determine prior relationship with the sufferer by producing sure letters, which have been denied to be written by the sufferer by her in proof and no cogent materials could possibly be positioned on document to show the identical. The delay in lodging the FIR has correctly been defined within the FIR itself and in view of regulation laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court docket as mentioned above, the delay is immaterial in such circumstances, notably when the prosecution has proved its case. The plea of implication of the applicant on the bottom of enmity couldn’t be proved by the appellant and no proof could possibly be adduced to show any enmity,”
-the Court docket added.
Advocate Ashutosh Singh and B.S. Patel appeared on behalf of the accused.
Extra Authorities Advocate Badrul Hasan represented the State.
CASE TITLE:
Pradeep Kumar v State
Would You Like Assistance In Drafting A Legal Notice Or Complaint?
CLICK HERE
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Rape
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Allahabad High Court
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
