Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Ravi Malimath, CJ, and Vishal Mishra, J.
Hemraj Chaudhary v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
Criminal Appeal No. 1647 of 2010 (Jabalpur): against the judgment and sentence dated 24.6.2010 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST), Jabalpur in Sessions Trial No. 193/2009;
Decided on 9.1.2024
(1) Penal Code, 1860 -- Ss. 342, 374(2) and 376(f) -- rape with 12 years old minor -- victim specifically narrated manner in which act was committed by appellant -- her statement duly corroborated by statement of her mother -- FIR lodged within short period of 40 minutes after incident -- fact that offence has been committed by appellant could not be disputed -- no material on record to substantiate the fact that appellant has not committed any offence -- statement of victim corroborated by medical report and statement of mother -- she is sterling witness -- trial Court has not committed any error in holding appellant guilty. (2010) 8 SCC 191, (2020) 10 SCC 573, (2012) 8 SCC 21 and (1996) 2 SCC 384 followed. [Paras 9, 13 & 15]
(2) Witness -- “sterling witness” -- victim immediately narrated incident to her mother -- remained consistent with her statement -- her statement corroborated by medical report and statement of mother -- she is sterling witness -- mere fact that other witnesses have turned hostile, cannot be ground to disbelieve prosecution story and statement of victim. (2012) 8 SCC 21 and (1996) 2 SCC 384 followed. [Para 13]
(3) Witness -- rape victim -- prosecutrix is not an accomplice -- she stands at higher pedestal than injured witness -- in case of injured witness, injury is caused in physical form -- in cases involving sexual assault, injury is both physical as well as psychological and emotional. [Para 15]
(4) Penal Code, 1860 -- Ss. 342, 374(2) and 376(f) -- sentence -- rape with minor aged about 12 years -- victim has not even attained age of puberty -- unable to understand consequences of act -- not in position to give consent -- rather, entire statement of victim shows that she was forcefully taken into house and thereafter sexual assault was done -- rape with minor is not only offence against particular individual, but it is offence against entire society at large -- such sexual assault on minor aged about 12 years or below shocks conscience of Court -- for such heinous offence, life imprisonment is appropriate punishment. [Paras 16 & 17]
¼1½ naM lafgrk] 1860 & /kkjk 342] 374¼2½ rFkk 376¼p½ & 12 o"kZ dh vçkIro; ds lkFk cykRlax & ihfM+rk us fofufnZ"V o.kZu fd;k fd vihykFkhZ }kjk —R; fdl jhfr esa fd;k x;k & mldk dFku mldh ekrk ds dFku ls lE;d:is.k laiq"V & ?kVuk ds i'pkr~ 40 fefuV dh vYikof/k ds Hkhrj çFke bfÙkyk fjiksVZ nkf[ky & ;g rF; fookfnr ugha fd;k tk ldk fd vijk/k vihykFkhZ }kjk fd;k x;k & ;g rF; fl) djus ds fy, vfHkys[k ij dksbZ lkexzh ugha fd vihykFkhZ us dksbZ vijk/k ugha fd;k & ihfM+rk dk dFku fpfdRlk çfrosnu vkSj ekrk ds dFku ls laiq"V & og mR—"V lk{kh gS & fopkj.k U;k;ky; us vihykFkhZ dks nks"kh vfHkfu/kkZfjr djus esa dksbZ xyrh ugha dhA ¼2010½ 8 ,llhlh 191] ¼2020½ 10 ,llhlh 573] ¼2012½ 8 ,llhlh 21 rFkk ¼1996½ 2 ,llhlh 384 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 9] 13 ,oa 15½
¼2½ lk{kh & ^^mR—"V lk{kh** & ihfM+rk us vfoyac viuh ekrk dks ?kVuk dk o.kZu fd;k & vius dFku ij –ढ+ jgh & mldk dFku fpfdRlk çfrosnu vkSj ekrk ds dFku ls laiq"V & og mR—"V lk{kh gS & ek= ;g rF; fd vU; lk{khx.k i{kæksgh gks x,] vfHk;kstui{k dh dgkuh vkSj ihfM+rk ds dFku ij vfo'okl djus dk vk/kkj ugha gks ldrkA ¼2012½ 8 ,llhlh 21 rFkk ¼1996½ 2 ,llhlh 384 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 13½
¼3½ lk{kh & cykRlax ihfM+rk & vfHk;ksäh lg vijk/kh ugha gksrh & og vkgr lk{kh ls mPprj iknihB ij vklhu gksrh gS & vkgr lk{kh ds ekeys esa {kfr 'kkfjfjd :i esa gksrh gS & ftu ekeyksa esa ySafxd geyk varoZfyr gksrk gS muesa {kfr 'kkjhfjd ds lkFk gh euksxr vkSj HkkoukRed nksuksa gksrh gSA ¼iSjk 15½
¼4½ naM lafgrk] 1860 & /kkjk 342] 374¼2½ rFkk 376¼p½ & naMkns'k & yxHkx 12 o"kZ o; dh vçkIro; ls cykRlax & ihfM+rk ;kSoukxe dh o; rd dh ugha & —R; ds ifj.kke le>us esa vleFkZ & lEefr nsus dh fLFkfr esa ugha & vfirq] ihfM+rk ds laiw.kZ dFku ls nf'kZr gksrk gS fd mls cyiwoZd edku esa ys tk;k x;k vkSj rR'pkr~ ySafxd geyk fd;k x;k & vçkIro; ls cykRlax fdlh fof'k"V O;fä ds fo:) gh vijk/k ugha] vfirq lexz O;kid lekt ds fo:) vijk/k gS & yxHkx 12 o"kZ ;k mlls de o; dh vçkIro; ij ,sls ySafxd geys ls U;k;ky; dh var'psruk dks vk?kkr igq¡prk gS & ,sls t?kU; vijk/k ds fy, vkthou dkjkokl leqfpr naM gSA ¼iSjk 16 ,oa 17½
JUDGMENT
Mishra, J. -- 1. Being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24.6.2010 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST) Jabalpur in Sessions Trial No.193 of 2009 whereby the appellant has been convicted under sections 342 and 376(f) of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year and fine of Rs.1000/- and R.I. for Life and fine of Rs.1000/- respectively with default stipulation, the present appeal under section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred.
2. The prosecution story, in nutshell, is that on 18.1.2009 at about 7:00 pm when the victim who was aged about 12 years was going to take water along with her friend Saraswati, the appellant/accused caught hold of her hands, dragged her to his house and committed rape on her. She immediately reported the incident to her mother. An FIR has been registered and the victim was sent for medical examination to the hospital and admitted in the hospital. After investigation, a charge-sheet has been filed before the Court. After trial, the appellant/accused has been convicted and sentenced as indicated hereinabove.
3. This appeal has been filed on the ground that there are material contradictions and omissions in the statements of the prosecution witnesses. It is argued that the learned trial Court has convicted the appellant for the offence under section 376(f) of the Indian Penal Code, which in terms of the previous law provides for a punishment of rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years but which may be extended for life and shall also be liable to fine. He has drawn attention of this Court to paragraph 9 of the judgment wherein a finding has been recorded that the age of the victim on the date of commission of offence was between 12-14 years. He has further pointed out that in paragraphs No.25 and 27 of the judgment, the learned trial Court has observed that the age of the victim is approximately 12 years. It is argued that once the age of the victim is found to be more than 12 years then conviction under section 376(f) of the Indian Penal Code for life imprisonment will not be maintainable as the case of the appellant does not fall under category 376(f) of the Indian Penal Code. The aforesaid aspect was not properly appreciated by the learned trial Court and a harsh punishment for life imprisonment has been imposed upon the appellant.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant has drawn attention of this Court to the educational document produced by the prosecution, in terms whereof, age of the victim is recorded as 31.3.1996 and if a calculation of age is made from that date, the age of the victim on the date of commission of offence comes to 12 years and 10 months. Therefore, apparently provisions of section 376(f) of the IPC are not attracted in the present case. The prosecution has not produced any other document to substantiate the age of the victim despite of the fact that she has admitted in her statement that she has studied upto Class-IV. Apart from the aforesaid arguments, it is pointed out that the prosecution story appears to be suspicious as place of incident is surrounded by houses and several people are residing there. The incident has occurred in the day light and, therefore, there should be someone available who has seen the appellant taking away the victim forcefully, but no such material was brought on record by the prosecution. Other witnesses Saraswati (PW/3) and Hallu @ Gopal (PW/5) have not supported the prosecution story and turned hostile. Hallu @ Gopal (PW/5) was a witness who went along with the mother of the victim to the police station to lodge the FIR. The factum of previous enmity is also pointed out, which is reflected from the statements of the witnesses. Learned trial Court has failed to consider the statements of the witnesses who have not supported the prosecution case, even the medical evidence is silent regarding commission of rape on the victim. U
The reliability of the victim's testimony and the lack of requirement for corroboration in cases of sexual assault were central legal principles established in the judgment.
The sole testimony of a victim in sexual assault cases can suffice for conviction if credible, without needing corroboration unless compelling reasons exist.
The main legal point established is that the court relied on the victim's testimony, medical reports, and witness statements to establish the accused's guilt, emphasizing the victim's age, lack of co....
The sole testimony of a victim in sexual assault cases can sustain a conviction if credible, without the necessity for corroboration.
The main legal point established is that the testimony of the victim/prosecutrix can be the sole basis for conviction in cases of sexual assault, without the need for corroboration, if found trustwor....
The sole testimony of the prosecutrix can be the sole basis for conviction in cases of sexual offences, and there is no legal compulsion to seek corroboration of her statement, as long as it inspires....
The sole testimony of a victim in sexual assault cases can suffice for conviction if credible, without needing corroboration unless compelling reasons exist.
The sole testimony of a prosecutrix can suffice for conviction in rape cases if credible, while age determination must be supported by reliable evidence.
The conviction for sexual assault can be based solely on the victim's credible testimony, and the POCSO Act mandates minimum sentences for such offences against minors.
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
