In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court has upheld a decades-old conviction in a rape case, dismissing the criminal appeal filed by Amar Nath Singh. The Court found no reason to interfere with the trial court’s findings, observing that the prosecution had proved the case beyond reasonable doubt.
Background of the Case
The case dates back to October 1984, when a minor girl alleged that she was sexually assaulted while grazing her goat in an agricultural field in Azamgarh. Based on her complaint, an FIR was registered under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.
The trial court, in December 1986, convicted the accused and sentenced him to seven years of rigorous imprisonment along with a fine. Challenging this conviction, the accused filed an appeal before the High Court.
Appearing for the appellant, Amicus Curiae argued that the case was based on false implication due to prior disputes between families. It was contended that there were inconsistencies in witness statements and that key witnesses, including the victim’s mother, were not examined.
The defence also questioned the medical evidence, suggesting that the injuries could have resulted from a fall rather than assault.
On the other hand, the State argued that the victim’s testimony was consistent and credible. The prosecution emphasized that medical evidence supported the allegations and confirmed injuries consistent with force.
Justice Manoj Bajaj carefully examined the record and noted that the prosecution’s case primarily rested on the testimony of the victim, which remained firm even after cross-examination.
“The testimony of the prosecutrix has gone unimpeached and she consistently accused the appellant,” the Court observed.
The Court also relied on medical reports, which showed fresh injuries and confirmed that the victim was below 15 years of age at the time of the incident.
Addressing the defence argument about non-examination of certain witnesses, the Court held:
“Merely because some witnesses were not examined would not weaken the prosecution case, especially when the victim’s testimony is reliable.”
The Court further rejected the argument that injuries could have been caused by a fall, noting that such suggestions were not convincingly established and were inconsistent with the overall evidence.
After evaluating the evidence, the High Court concluded that the trial court had properly appreciated the facts and material on record. It found that the prosecution had successfully proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
“The findings of the trial court are based on proper appreciation of evidence and do not warrant interference,” the Court held.
Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed, and the conviction and sentence awarded in 1986 were upheld.
Case Details
Case Title: Amar Nath Singh vs State of U.P.
Case Number: Criminal Appeal No. 3129 of 1986
Judge: Justice Manoj Bajaj
Decision Date: April 8, 2026
