Delhi High Court Reduces Conviction in Rape Case: Procedural Lapses in Arrest and Recovery Highlighted

Headnote:

The Delhi High Court modified the conviction of the appellant in a case registered under FIR 353/16 at PS Mehrauli, Delhi. While upholding convictions under Sections 452, 506, 394, and 323 IPC, the Court reduced the conviction under Section 376 IPC to Section 376/511 IPC due to inconsistencies in the medical evidence and procedural lapses in recovery of robbed items. The Court observed that lapses in arrest and seizure proceedings cast doubt on the authenticity of recovery, leading to acquittal under Section 411 IPC. The appellant’s sentence was adjusted to the period already served.

Background:

1. The appellant was convicted by the Trial Court on 02.06.2018 for offences under Sections 376/452/506/394/323 IPC arising from an incident on 05.02.2016.
2. The prosecutrix alleged forcible sexual assault and robbery of her jewelry and mobile phone by the appellant, who was known to her as an employee in a nearby shoes factory.
3. The appellant was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment ranging from 2 to 12 years along with fines. All sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
4. The appellant challenged the conviction and sentence, raising issues of credibility of the prosecutrix, contradictions in evidence, and procedural irregularities in arrest and recovery of articles.

Court’s Observations:

1. Credibility of Witness: The Court classified the testimony of the prosecutrix in the “neither wholly reliable nor wholly unreliable” category. While identity and some details were corroborated, there were material improvements in her testimony over time.
2. Medical Evidence: Medical records indicated only attempted penetration with no injuries to private parts, inconsistent with later statements alleging rape.
3. Procedural Lapses: The arrest and recovery process contained overwriting of dates, lack of witnesses at critical stages, absence of photographic evidence, and non-exhibition of FSL reports. These procedural lapses cast doubt on recovery of robbed items.
4. Reliance on Evidence: Given inconsistencies, the Court reduced the conviction under Section 376 IPC to attempt under Section 376/511 IPC but maintained convictions under Sections 452, 506, 394, and 323 IPC due to consistent corroboration by witnesses and medical evidence.

Legal Provisions Discussed:

1. Section 376 IPC – Punishment for rape.
2. Section 376/511 IPC – Attempt to commit rape.
3. Sections 452, 506, 394, 323 IPC – House trespass, criminal intimidation, robbery, and voluntarily causing hurt.
4. Section 411 IPC – Dishonestly receiving stolen property.
5. Section 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. – Recording statements of the victim.

Outcome:

1. Conviction under Section 376 IPC reduced to Section 376/511 IPC.
2. Conviction under Section 411 IPC set aside.
3. Convictions under Sections 452, 506, 394, and 323 IPC upheld.
4. Sentences adjusted to the period already served, fines maintained with default clause.
5. Appellant’s bail bonds cancelled and sureties discharged.

Citation: 2025:DEL:1020

Case: Irshad v. State of NCT of Delhi

Court: High Court of Delhi at New Delhi

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri

Date of Decision: 18 November 2025

Criminal Appeal No.: CRL.A.1020/2018