Roshan v State of Maharashtra, 2025
The Court held that minor injuries or medical signs of sexual activity alone are insufficient to prove the absence of consent.
Judgement Details
Court
Bombay High Court
Date of Decision
15 October 2025
Judges
Justice Nivedita P. Mehta
Citation
Acts / Provisions
Facts of the Case
-
The appellant, Roshan Ruprao Bandre, was convicted and sentenced to 10 years imprisonment under Section 376 IPC for allegedly kidnapping and raping a 17-year-old girl.
-
The victim was earlier the appellant’s tenant.
-
The prosecution produced a birth certificate and school records to prove victim’s minority, but these documents were found unreliable and conflicting.
-
The victim stayed with the accused for 3-4 days, was introduced as his wife, and wore a mangalsutra during that time.
-
The victim’s testimony contained material inconsistencies, including claims of being given a substance before the assault making her semi-conscious.
Issues
-
Whether the minor injuries or medical signs of sexual activity can conclusively prove the absence of consent?
-
Whether the prosecution established the victim's minority conclusively?
-
Whether the evidence supported the charge of forcible sexual assault beyond reasonable doubt?
Judgement
-
The Court held that minor injuries or medical signs of sexual activity alone are insufficient to prove the absence of consent.
-
The birth certificate and school records were unreliable and contradictory, failing to conclusively prove the victim was a minor.
-
The victim’s behavior, including staying with the accused without raising alarm and wearing a mangalsutra, weakened the prosecution’s case of forcible assault.
-
Inconsistencies and contradictions in the victim’s testimony raised serious doubts about her version of events.
-
Medical evidence showed minor abrasions and redness, but the doctor did not confirm forceful intercourse as cause.
-
The Court emphasized that presence of minor injuries without evidence of trauma or resistance cannot prove non-consensual sex conclusively.
-
Where two interpretations exist, the Court must favor the accused, and the possibility of a consensual relationship could not be ruled out.
-
Hence, the Court found that the essential ingredients of Section 376 IPC were not proved beyond reasonable doubt.
Held
-
The conviction and sentence were set aside.
-
The appellant was acquitted of the charges.
Analysis
-
The judgment clarifies the limits of medical evidence in proving non-consent in sexual assault cases.
-
It underscores the importance of consistency and reliability of victim testimony.
-
The ruling stresses that benefit of doubt must go to the accused if prosecution evidence is inconclusive or contradictory.
-
It highlights the need for corroborative evidence beyond minor physical signs to establish forcible sexual assault.