{"issue_text":"Whether the complainant’s identification of the accused by moonlight in a dark bedroom hut is reliable","issue_type":"fact","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Complainant saw accused’s face by moonlight; no explanation how moonlight entered hut"}
{"issue_text":"Whether the delayed and extracted complaint meets the standard for admissibility and reliability","issue_type":"mixed","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Complaint made 6 months later only when confronted about pregnancy; initially denied pregnancy"}
{"issue_text":"Whether the evidence proves rape beyond reasonable doubt","issue_type":"mixed","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Doubtful identification, extracted complaint, complainant’s sexual history"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
A 14-year-old complainant alleged that the accused, her cousin, raped her in December 2019 while she slept in her bedroom hut. The complaint only surfaced in April 2020 when her grandmother questioned her about her pregnancy. The accused denied the charge. The court found numerous credibility issues with the complainant’s evidence, including doubtful identification by moonlight, failure to scream or report promptly, and the circumstances under which the complaint was extracted.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases