Secondly, and more importantly, there is a fatal
flaw in the prosecution case on account of the failure
to get identification of the accused done by the victim
during her deposition before the trial Court. {Para 53}
54. We feel that the presiding officer of the trial
Court as well as the Public Prosecutor were equally
responsible for this fatal omission. The significance
of this omission is further amplified by the fact that
the accused was not named in the FIR; the victim
categorically stated that the police had disclosed his
name to her and; the prosecution merely relied upon
the TIP to establish the identity of the accused.
55. The prosecution case thus suffers from serious
infirmities regarding the identification of the accused;
grave contradiction between the medical evidence
pertaining to the age of the injuries and the alleged
time of the incident as set out in the FIR and the
depositions of the prosecution witnesses.
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). 135 OF 2026
DHANRAJ Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN
Author: Mehta, J.
Dated: SEPTEMBER 07, 2026.
