The Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench) dismissed the appeals of four accused convicted for gang rape and related offences, upholding life imprisonment and additional sentences awarded by the trial court under IPC Sections 376D, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34.
On August 27, 2015, the victim and her boyfriend were approached by four men on a motorcycle near Cambridge School Road. The men assaulted the boyfriend and dragged the victim into a nearby field where she was gang-raped at knife point. The victim escaped and reported the incident. Police investigation included medical exams, DNA tests, and Test Identification Parade, establishing connections between accused and crime.
The trial court convicted all accused on 18 October 2019, sentencing them to life imprisonment for gang rape under Section 376D IPC and additional sentences for related offences. The present appeals claimed identification errors, procedural irregularities, and inconsistencies in the victim’s statements.
The Bench comprising Justice Nitin B. Suryawanshi and Justice Sandipkumar C. More noted procedural deviations in identification parades but held them non-prejudicial, affirming the weight of eyewitness testimony and corroborative forensic evidence including DNA. The court acknowledged that psychological impact could explain variations in statements and lack of resistance under threat. Relying on precedents, the court held victim’s testimony credible even with minor inconsistencies, emphasizing victim protection in sexual offence cases.
In result, the court upheld the convictions on the basis of victim’s credible and detailed testimony corroborated by eyewitness, forensic evidence, and consistent police investigation. The court also ordered legal aid fees for victim’s representation.
The verdict affirms that procedural irregularities do not automatically vitiate valid identification if overall evidence is cogent.
Case relied on:
1. State of Punjab vs Gurmit Singh and others, (1996) 2 SCC 384
Appearances:
Senior Advocate Mr. Rajendra Deshmukh a/w Mr. Vishal Chavan i/b Mr. Devang Deshmukh, Advocate for the Appellant-Accused No. 1; Mr. Imran G. Durani, Advocate for the Appellant-Accused No.2; Mr. Sudarshan J. Salunke, Advocate for the Appellant-Accused No. 3
Mr. A. S. Shinde, APP, for Respondent No.1-State
Mrs. Kalpana S. Kulkarni (Sonpawale), Advocate for Respondent No.2 (Appointed through Legal Aid)
