Penal Code, 1860 – s.376 – Evidence of a child witness-victim – Appreciation of – Rape of minor girl – High Court reversed the conviction of the respondent-accused inter alia holding that the victim-child witness was indifferent/silent about the incident which was unlikely if the incident would have been true, and acquitted him – Challenge to:
Held: There is no hard and fast rule qua testing the competency of a child witness to testify at trial – In the present case, though the child witness-victim (‘V’) did not depose anything about the commission of the offence against her however, her silence cannot accrue to the benefit of the respondent – Her silence cannot be equated with the silence of a fully realised adult prosecutrix – There is no hard and fast rule that in the absence of the testimony of the prosecutrix, a conviction cannot stand, particularly when other evidence, medical and circumstantial, is available pointing to such a conclusion – The absence of evidence of the prosecutrix is, not in all cases, a negative to be accounted for in the prosecution case – PW-14, the Doctor stated that the cause of injury to ‘V’ can be through sexual intercourse – This along with the finding of injury on the genital organ of the accused being possible only due to forceful intercourse with a minor female, leads to a circumstance pointing to the respondent having committed the offense against ‘V’ – Acquittal of the respondent is set aside, conviction restored – Circumstantial evidence. [Paras 14, 17, 20-22] Evidence – Testimony of a child witness – Principles – Discussed. [Para 14]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Divya Pandey. 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.