SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Pat) 1216

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
A. M. Badar, J.
Tulmul Rai @ Bisheshwar Rai, son of Late Siyasharan Rai – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar - Respondent
Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.968 of 2016
Decided On : 05-08-2022

Advocates Appeared:
For the Respondent: Mr. Binod Bihari Singh, APP

The victim's evidence in cases of rape holds significant importance, and if it does not have any motive to falsely implicate the accused, corroboration may not be necessary, and the court is generally bound to accept the victim's version.

Headnote:

RAPE - Indian Penal Code - Section 376 - Evidence of victim of the crime in question in the offence of rape is of prime importance. It is well settled that the victim of the offence of rape is not an accomplice, but she is the victim of lust of another person. Her evidence stands on a higher pedestal than the evidence of an injured witness. If totality of circumstances emerging on record discloses that the victim of such offence does not have any motive to falsely implicate the accused, then, it is absolutely not necessary to search for any corroboration to the evidence of the victim of such offence and the court is generally bound to accept the version of such victim.

Fact of the Case:

The case involved the prosecution of the accused for the offence of rape under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. The victim, a 12-year-old girl, was allegedly raped by the accused in an orchard. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

Finding of the Court:

The court found the evidence of the victim to be truthful, trustworthy, and reliable, and concluded that the charge framed against the accused was proved beyond all reasonable doubt. The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the judgment and order of conviction and sentencing the accused to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years.

Issues: The key issue revolved around the credibility of the victim's testimony and whether there was any motive for the victim to falsely implicate the accused in the crime.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of the victim's evidence in cases of rape, stating that if the victim's testimony does not have any motive to falsely implicate the accused, then there is no need for corroboration and the court is generally bound to accept the victim's version.

Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the judgment and order of conviction and sentencing the accused to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years were upheld.

JUDGMENT :

By this appeal, appellant/convicted accused, Tulmul Rai @ Bisheshwar Rai is challenging the Judgment and order dated 26.08.2016 and 29.08.2016 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rosera, Samastipur, in Sessions Trial No. 286 of 2012 between the parties, thereby convicting him of the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years apart from a direction to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. For the sake of convenience, the appellant shall be referred to in his original capacity as “an accused”.

2. Facts leading to the prosecution of the accused projected from the police report can be summarized thus:-

    A. P.W. 5 Mr. S. (identity concealed) used to reside at village Narhan Durga Asthan falling under jurisdiction of Police Station Bibhutipur, District Samastipur. The victim of the crime in question is his 12 years old daughter P.W. 4 Ms. S. (identify concealed). The incident in question allegedly took place at about 11 P.M. of 12.05.2010. At that time, P.W. 5 Mr. S. (identity concealed) was not present at the house. He had gone for purchasing medicines. His wife P.W. 3 Mrs. M. (identity concealed) had gone to visit Doctor Kanak for her treatment. Their daughter P.W. 4 Ms. S. was alone in the house.

B. According to the prosecution case, at about 8 P.M. of 12.05.2010, the accused enticed Ms. S. and took her to the orchard of Dina Choudhary. There he had committed forcible sexual intercourse with P.W. 4 Ms. J.

C. Upon knowing about the incident, P.W. 5 Mr. S. lodged report on 12.05.2010 with Police Station Bibhutipur which has resulted in registration of Crime No. 120 of 2010 for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code against the accused.

D. After following routine investigation, the accused came to be charge sheeted. The learned trial court had framed and explained the charge to the accused. He pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

E. In order to bring home the guilt to the accused, the prosecution has examined in all five witnesses. The defence of the accused was that of total denial. He however did not enter in the defeance.

3. Despite chances none appeared for the appellant. I heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing the State. He supported the impugned Judgment and order.

4. Upon hearing the submissions of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and on perusal of the record and proceedings, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned Judgment and order of conviction and resultant sentence is not requiring any interference and the appeal deserves to be dismissed.

5. Evidence of the victim of the crime in question in the offence of rape is of prime importance. By now, it is well settled that rape is a ghastly act which leaves the victim shattered for the life as it causes not only physical but emotional and psychological trauma to the victim. Sexual activities with young girls of immature age have a traumatic effect on them, which persists throughout the life of such victims. It is also well settled that the victim of offence of rape is not an accomplice, but she is the victim of lust of another person. Her evidence, therefore, stands on higher pedestal than the evidence of an injured witness. Therefore, if totality of circumstances emerging on record discloses that the victim of such offence does not have any motive to falsely implicate the accused, then, it is absolutely not necessary to search for any corroboration to the evidence of the victim of such offence and the court is generally bound to accept version of such victim.

6. It is in evidence of P.W. 4 Ms. S. that on the day of the incident, at about 8 P.M., she was cooking food at her house. At that time, the accused came and forcibly took her in the orchard of Dina Choudhary. There the accused committed rape on her. The victim of the crime in question further deposed that when she

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top