Wrongly Convicted Database Record

 

Go to Database Search Page

Go to  Database Index Page

Indian Landlord

 

Charge:

Rape

Sentence:

10 years

Years Imprisoned:

7

Year Crime:

2009

Year Convicted:

2013

Year Cleared:

2016

U.S. State or Country of Crime:

India

County or Region of Crime:

City of Crime:

Result:

Judicially Exonerated Released

Summary of Case:

"An Indian landlord was wrongly convicted in April 2013 of raping his married tenant on November 13, 2009. The man's prosecution was based on the testimony of the alleged victim. After his conviction the man was sentenced to ten years imprisonment. He had already been in custody for 3 years and 5 months since his arrest in Nov. 2009. The man appealed. In November 2016 the Delhi High court set aside the man's conviction on the basis the prosecution failed to introduce sufficient evidence to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and ordered his immediate release. In the High Court's ruling Justice S P Garg said the woman's version was not "convincing," and there were several "defects" in the prosecution story and the man "deserves benefit of doubt." "Taking into consideration the inherent defects in the prosecution case, the vital infirmities and discrepancies in the statements of the prosecution witnesses, the version given by the prosecutrix cannot be considered cogent and convincing to base conviction in the absence of any independent corroboration... In the light of above discussion, conviction and sentence recorded by the trial court cannot be sustained. The appellant deserves benefit of doubt." Justice Garg observed that during the trial neither the woman's husband nor her children were examined. "The prosecutrix disclosed that she had informed her husband about the rape incident soon after its occurrence. However, he did not rush to the spot and asked her to inform the police authorities on her own. ...This conduct of the prosecutrix and her husband is highly unbelievable. Victim's husband after coming to know of the incident is not expected to remain aloof...and not move the authorities concerned to apprehend the culprit.""

Conviction Caused By:

False testimony by the alleged victim.

Innocence Proved By:

"In November 2016 the Delhi High court set aside the man's conviction on the basis the prosecution failed to introduce sufficient evidence to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and ordered his immediate release."

Defendant Aided By:

Compensation Awarded:

Was Perpetrator Identified?

Age When Imprisoned:

Age When Released:

Sex:

Male

Skin/Ethnicity:

Indian

Information Source 1:

"Delhi HC sets aside man’s 10-year jail term in rape case, By PTI (New Delhi), The Indian Express, November 13, 2016"

Information Location 1:

http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-news-india/delhi-hc-sets-aside-mans-10-year-jail-term-in-rape-case-4372673/

Information Source 2:

"HC sets aside man's 10-year jail term in rape case, By PTI, Press Trust of India, November 14, 2016"

Information Location 2:

http://www.ptinews.com/news/8071782_HC-sets-aside-man--s-10-year-jail-term-in-rape-case-

Information Source 3:

Information Location 3:

Information Source 4:

Information Location 4:

Information Source 5:

Information Location 5:

Book About Case:

Book Information:

Book About Case (2):

Book Information (2):

Movie About Case:

Comments About Case:

Innocents Database Created and Maintained by Hans Sherrer innocents@forejustice.org

Hosted on forejustice.org and mirrored on justicedenied.org .