Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
KAUSHIK GOSWAMI, J.
BALURAM DEKA S/O SHRI SATRAM DEKA – Petitioner
Versus
THE STATE OF ASSAM – Respondent
Crl. Appeal No. 103 of 2023
Decided On : 29-08-2024
Criminal Law - Rape - IPC Sections 376(1), 448 - The Court emphasized that conviction can be based solely on the testimony of the victim if found credible, and medical evidence is not a prerequisite for establishing the crime of rape.
Fact of the Case:
The victim alleged that the accused entered her home and raped her while threatening her. The FIR was lodged the next day, and the accused was charged under IPC Sections 376(1) and 448 after investigation.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found the victim's testimony credible and corroborated by other witnesses, despite the absence of medical evidence indicating recent sexual intercourse.
Issues: Whether the absence of medical evidence and delay in filing the FIR undermined the prosecution's case against the accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the testimony of the victim, if credible, is sufficient for conviction in rape cases, and corroboration is not mandatory unless the victim's credibility is in doubt.
Result: The appeal was dismissed, affirming the conviction of the accused.
JUDGMENT :
KAUSHIK GOSWAMI, J.
1. Heard Mr. R. Deka, learned counsel for the accused-appellant. Also heard Mr. R.R. Kaushik, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent.
2. This appeal is presented under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (herein after referred to as Cr.P.C.) against the Judgment and Order dated 13.12.2022 passed by the learned Court of Sessions Judge, Darrang, Mangaldoi in Sessions Case No. 119(DM)/2022, whereby, the accused appellant was sentenced to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of 10(ten) years and fine of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand), in default Rigorous Imprisonment for another 6 (six) months for the offence under Section 376(1) of the Indian Penal Code(herein after referred to as IPC) and also Rigorous Imprisonment for 6 (six) months for the offence under Section 448 of the IPC; to run concurrently.
3. The case of the prosecution in brief is that, on 03.03.2022, victim/informant/PW-1 lodged an FIR before the jurisdictional Police Station alleging inter alia that on 02.03.2022, at around 11:30 AM, while she was alone and was sleeping in her house, the accused-appellant entered into her house and by gagging her mouth forcefully committed rape on her and threatened her not to disclose the same to anybody.
4. Upon receipt of the aforesaid FIR, a case was registered as Mangaldoi P.S. Case No. 93/2022 under Sections 448/376/506 of the IPC.
5. During the course of investigation, PW-5 (Pranita Taid, Investigating Officer) recorded the statement of the victim/informant/PW-1 and further got the statement of the victim/informant/PW-1 recorded by PW-6 (Dr. Gitanjali Devi) i.e. Judicial Magistrate, under Section 164 Cr.PC and had also sent the victim/informant/PW-1 for medical examination before PW-3 (Dr. Ajanta Bordoloi, Medical Officer) who after medically examining the victim/informant/PW-1 submitted a report which was received by the PW-5 and thereafter arrested the accused appellant. Upon completion of the investigation, PW-5 submitted charge-sheet against the appellant accused under Section 448/376/506 of IPC.
6. Thereafter, the jurisdictional Magistrate Court upon production of the accused appellant, committed the case to the Court of Sessions and the Trial Court thereupon framed the charges under Section 448/376/506 of IPC against the accused appellant, whereafter the accused appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed for trial.
7. Accordingly, the trial commenced, wherein, the prosecution examined 6(six) witnesses, namely PW-1 the victim/informant, PW-2 Himani Deka, PW-3 Dr. Ajanta Bordoloi, PW-4 Manisha Deka, PW-5 Pranita Taid, Investigating Officer and PW-6 Dr. Gitanjali Devi and also exhibited 5(five) numbers of documents being, Exhibit P-1/PW-1 FIR, Exhibit P-2/PW-1 Statement of victim, Exhibit P-3/PW-3 Medical report, Exhibit P-4/PW-5 Sketch map and Exhibit P-5/PW-5 Charge sheet.
8. Thereafter, all the incriminating circumstances were put to the accused appellant under Section 313 Cr.P.C., wherein, the accused appellant generally denied the said circumstances and declined to adduce evidence.
9. Upon completion of trial, the Trial Court rendered its Judgment and Order dated 13.12.2022, whereby the accused appellant was convicted under Section 376(1)/448 of IPC and sentenced thereof.
10. Mr. R. Deka, learned counsel for the appellant accused submits that the Judgment and Order dated 13.12.2022, passed by the learned Trial Court suffers from lacuna for which the conviction ought not to be sustained.
11. He further submits that the victim/informant/PW-1’s version of commission of rape is not supported by the medical evidence and therefore, the prosecution has failed to bring home the charge of Section 376 of IPC.
12. He further submits that there are inconsistencies in the testimony of the victim/informant/PW-1 and therefore, the prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond all reasonable doubt.
13. He further submits that despite the availability of other prosecu
The Court established that a victim's testimony can suffice for conviction in rape cases, even without medical corroboration, provided it is credible.
The sole testimony of a victim in sexual assault cases can sustain a conviction if credible, without the necessity for corroboration.
Rape – Conviction can be sustained on sole testimony of prosecutrix if it inspires confidence – There is no rule of law or practice that evidence of prosecutrix cannot be relied upon without corrobor....
The conviction for rape was upheld based on the prosecutrix's credible testimony, while the conviction under the SC/ST Act was quashed due to lack of evidence regarding the accused's knowledge of the....
Testimony of the victim in such cases is vital and unless there are compelling reasons which necessitate looking for corroboration of her statement, the courts should find no difficulty to act on the....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
