2005 Supreme(SC) 1489

2005(7) Supreme 742
Supreme Court of India
(From Himachal Pradesh High Court)
H.K. Sema & P.P. Naolekar, JJ.
State of Himachal Pradesh —Appellant
versus
Asha Ram —Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1266 of 1998
Decided on 17-11-2005
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant : Virendra Kumar Sharma, Advocate for J.S. Attri, Advocate.
For the Respondent : Debasis Misra and Vinay Garg, Advocates.

Important point
Conviction for offence of rape can be founded on testimony of the prosecutrix alone unless there are compelling reasons for seeking corroboration.

Headnote:(i) Indian Penal Code, 1860—Section 376—Respondent accused was convicted by trial Court for having committed rape on his daughter—High Court set aside conviction in appeal—State appeal—Accused having strained relation with his wife PW3 was living separate with two daughter including victim prosecutrix—Defence plea of false implication on behest of PW3—High Court dealt casually with offence—Conviction could be founded on testimony of prosecutrix alone unless there were compelling reasons for seeking corroboration—Statement of prosecutrix, aged between 12½ to 15 years was well corroborated in all particulars by her sister PW2 and her mother PW3—Defence plea deserved to be rejected as victim had been residing with accused—Non-rupture of hymen or absence of injury on victim’s private parts would not belie her testimony—Conviction recorded by trial Court was liable to be restored.

       Held : We record our displeasure and dismay, the way the High Court dealt casually with the offence so grave, as in the case at hand, overlooking the alarming and shocking increase of sexual assault on the minor girls. The High Court was swayed by sheer insensitivity totally oblivious of growing menace of sex violence against the minors much less by the father. The High Court also totally overlooked the prosecution evidence, which inspired confidence and merited acceptance. It is now well settled principle of law that conviction can be founded on the testimony of the prosecutrix alone unless there are compelling reasons for seeking corroboration. The evidence of a prosecutrix is more reliable than that of an injured witness. The testimony of the victim of sexual assault is vital unless there are compelling reasons which necessitate looking for corroboration of her statement, the courts should find no difficulty in acting on the testimony of a victim of sexual assault alone to convict an accused where her testimony inspires confidence and is found to be reliable. It is also well settled principle of law that corroboration as a condition for judicial reliance on the testimony of the prosecutrix is not a requirement of law but a guidance of prudence under given circumstances. The evidence of the prosecutrix is more reliable than that of an injured witness. Even minor contradictions or insignificant discrepancies in the statement of the prosecutrix should not be a ground for throwing out an otherwise reliable prosecution case. (Para 5)

       (ii) Indian Penal Code, 1860—Section 376—Sentence—Accused committed rape on his minor daughter aged between 12½ to 15 years—Trial Court awarded sentence of 5 years imprisonment and fine Rs. 1000/- —Gratuity of crime has to be assessed from nature of crime—Father committing crime against his daughter was more graver and rarest of rare—Sentence enhanced to life imprisonment and fine also enhanced to Rs. 25000/- —Fine if realised to be paid to prosecutrix.

       Held : Here is the case where the crime committed by the respondent not only delicts the law but it has a deleterious effect on the civilized society. Gravity of the crime has to be necessarily assessed from the nature of the crime. A crime may be grave but the nature of the crime may not be so grave. Similarly, a crime may not be so grave but the nature of the crime may be very grave. Ordinarily, the offence of rape is grave by its nature. More so, when the perpetrator of the crime is the father against his own daughter it is more graver and the rarest of rare, which warrants a strong deterrent judicial hand. Even in ordinary criminal terminology a rape is a crime more heinous than murder as it destroys the very soul of hapless woman. This is more so when the perpetrator of the grave crime is the father of the victim girl. Father is a fortress, refuge and the trustee of his daughter. By betraying the trust and taking undue advantage of trust reposed in him by the daughter, serving food at odd hours at 12.30 A.M. he ravished the chastity of his daughter, jeopardized her future prospect of getting married, enjoying marital and conjugal life, has been totally devastated. Not only that, she carries an indelible social stigma on her head and deathless shame as long as she lives. Having said so, regarding sentence we are tempted to quote the observation of Justice Pandian in the case of Madan Gopal Kakkad (supra) where it has been observed that “Judges who bear the Sword of Justice should not hesitate to use that sword with the utmost severity, to the full and to the end if the gravity of the offences so demand.” So, while maintaining the conviction recorded by the Trial Court, we alter and enhance the sentence from 5 years rigorous imprisonment to imprisonment for life. We also enhance the fine amount of Rs. 1,000/- to Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand only). The fine amount if realized shall be paid to the prosecutrix. (Paras 21 to 23)