Penal Code, 1860 – ss. 450, 376(2) – Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 – s.4 – Allegation that appellantaccused entered the house of victim aged about 15 years and sent her brother aged about 11 years to bring a pack of chewing tobacco – Once the brother left the house, the accused forced the victim to lie on the cot lying in the porch of the house, gagged her mouth and then committed sexual intercourse – Trial Court convicted accused u/ss.450, 376(2) of IPC and s.4 of the POCSO Act – The High Court upheld and confirm the conviction – Correctness:
Held: 1. The High Court was wholly justified in upholding and confirming the conviction and sentence awarded to the appellantconvict, by the trial court. [Para 6.3]
2. Evaluating the total evidence in light of the principles of law, evidentiary appreciation and application, with the evidence of the victim at the forefront, it has to be stated that victim’s evidence was entirely probable, natural and trustworthy who with lucidity narrated the whole incident about commission of offence against her by the accused – There exists no reason, much less compelling reasons, to disbelieve and discard her testimony – Her brother’s testimony as a child witness was rationally and logically supportive of what the prosecutrix narrated – The factum that the cot was in the porch and the victim was forced to lay there by the accused could also be called out from the evidence. [Para 6]
3. There was a consistency lent – The conduct of the victim, soon after the incident was quite natural, as she went to cousin sister’s neighbouring house and through her, informed cousin brother and her parents who were away. [Para 6.1]
4. The crux of the incident, of accused overpowering the victim and committing forcible act by forcing her to the bed, could be clearly established from the totality of evidence adduced by the prosecution. [Para 6.2]
Penal Code, 1860 – ss.450, 376(2) – Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 – s.4 – Appellant-accused convicted by the trial Court u/ss.450, 376(2) of IPC and s.4 of the POCSO Act – It was contended by the accused that nonavailability of emphatic medical evidence about occurrence of physical intercourse and absence of external injury marks make it imperative to doubt and disregard the evidence of the prosecutrix:
Held: 1. The contention that non-availability of emphatic medical evidence about occurrence of physical intercourse and absence of external injury marks make it imperative to doubt and disregard the evidence of the prosecutrix, could hardly be countenanced. [Para 5.4.1]
2. The crux of the incident, of accused overpowering the victim and committing forcible act by forcing her to the bed, could be clearly established from the totality of evidence adduced by the prosecution – Merely because the medical evidence was less corroborative and less supportive or absent in details or indictive of no external injuries – It in no way weakened the prosecution case – Sole testimony of the victim was a strong evidence to rely on along with available attendant evidence. [Para 6.2]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Ankit Gyan. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.