Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Manmohan, Sangita Dhingra Sehgal, JJ.
State - Appellant
Versus
Vimal Kumar - Respondent
Crl.L.P. 526 of 2019
Decided On : 11-12-2019
In sexual assault cases, the conviction can rely on the sole testimony of the victim only if it is credible, trustworthy, and consistent.
Headnote:(A) Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Section 6 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 376, 506 - Leave petition against acquittal - The trial court acquitted the accused of sexual assault due to contradictions in the victim's testimony, finding it unworthy of belief - There is a presumption of innocence; the prosecution's case relies heavily on the uncorroborated testimony of the victim which was inconsistent (Paras 2, 26, 30) -
(B) Legal principles regarding child witness testimonies established; courts must evaluate the evidence carefully while considering the possibility of false allegations (Paras 9, 27) -
(C) Prosecution's reliance on minor discrepancies deemed improper; the court cautioned draw conclusions based on uncorroborated accounts (Paras 5, 19, 28).
Facts of the case:
Respondent acquitted of charges for sexual assault on a minor; allegations contested due to multiple inconsistencies in victim statements (Paras 1-4).
Findings of Court:
No medical evidence supports the claim of rape; inconsistencies in the victim’s statements create doubt resulting in acquittal.
Issues: The key question was whether the evidence presented was sufficient to establish the accused's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the sole testimony of the victim, despite the presumption of innocence, lacked reliability due to various contradictions and was insufficient to sustain a conviction.
Result: Leave petition dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. summary of case initiation and victim's testimony. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. prosecution's arguments on victim testimony's credibility. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. defendant's counterarguments on contradictions in testimony. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. legal principles regarding witness credibility in sexual cases. (Para 8 , 9 , 11) |
| 5. victim's contradictory statements affecting case credibility. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 6. medical evidence's inconsistencies with the victim's claims. (Para 19 , 24) |
| 7. presumption under pocso and need for consistency. (Para 26 , 28) |
| 8. court's final decision on leave petition and trial court's judgment. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33) |
Sangita Dhingra Sehgal, J. (Oral)--By the present Leave Petition filed under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as `Cr.P.C.') the State seeks leave to appeal against the judgment dated 15.03.2019 passed by Additional Sessions Judge-01, Special Court (POCSO) North West District, Rohini Court, New Delhi, whereby the respondent (accused before the Trial Court) was acquitted of the offences punishable under Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as `POCSO') and for the alternative charges under Section 376(2)(f)(i)(n)/506 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as `IPC').
2. The brief facts of the case, as stated by the learned Trial Court are reproduced as under:
"Brief facts of the prosecution case are that DD No. 56B dated 26.07.2015 was recorded on PCR call regarding wrong act with 9 years old daughter of the caller about three days before but the victim had informed today only. The IO reached the spot where complainant S mother of the victim V met the IO and gave her statement to the effect that her husband is running a factory of making ladies purse in the residence itself where 4-5 workers are working. All the workers belong to their family. Accused Vimal @ Karwa was working in the factory since February, 2015 and left for his native village on Holi. He came back on 05.07.2015 and started working again. Today she has gone to market with her husband at 11.30 a.m. and they returned at 1.30 p.m. and found victim V having a mobile in her hand. On inquiry, she told that this mobile belongs to accused and thereafter started weeping and further told that about 2-3 days before accused took her to the room on the pretext of showing her game in the mobile and removed her and his clothes and inserted his penis in her shu shu. When she screamed he pressed her mouth and threatened to not to tell it anyone or else her parents shall be killed. Today her daughter also reported stomach ache and she informed her husband who called the police. On her statement this FIR was registered. IO prepared the site plan and victim was brought to SGM hospital for her medical examination. Accused was arrested and was medically examined. Statement of victim u/s 164 Cr.P.C. was got recorded where she stated that accused used to call her on the pretext of mobile and used to do wrong act with her by inserting his penis in her vagina. He also applied mustard oil on her private part and his private part and also threatened not to tell it to anyone. She had severe stomach ache and informed her mother. Accused used to call her at 6.00/6.30pm. when her parents had gone to the market to get vegetables. Exhibits of the victim and accused were sent to FSL and after completion of investigation, chargesheet was filed."
3. In order to bring home the guilt of the accused person, the prosecution examined 11 witnesses in all. The incriminating evidence and circumstances were put to the accused person during his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., wherein he claimed to have been falsely implicated in the present case and examined one witness in his defence.
4. Aggrieved by the impugned judgment, Ms. Neelam Sharma, learned APP appearing for the State argued that the judgment dated 15.03.2019 is based on conjectures, sur
