However, the Court noted that,
“Perusal of the line of cross examination of the prosecutrix adopted by the appellant-accused shows that the case was of denial. Not even a suggestion has been given to the prosecutrix that there was a consent by the prosecutrix.”
It also found that the evidence of the prosecutrix is consistent with the statements made in the First Information Report (FIR).
Moreover, the contradictions in the statements are of insignificant nature, and do not affect the case of the prosecution, the Court added.
Source: Barandbench
