Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
K. LAKSHMAN, P. SREE SUDHA, JJ.
Lyadella Sanjeev @ Venkatesh and Another – Appellants
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 493 of 2014
Decided On : 06-02-2024
RAPE - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act - 2012, Section 5(g) read with 6 - 366, 376D, 506 read with 34 of IPC (Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013) - The court convicted the appellants for the offences punishable under Sections - 366, 376D and 506 read with 34 of IPC and Section - 5 (g) read with 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
Fact of the Case:
The victim, a 15-year-old girl, was raped by accused Nos. 1 and 2. The incident occurred when the victim's family members were away on a pilgrimage. The accused took advantage of the victim's father's inebriation and committed the crime. The victim reported the incident two days later, citing fear and trauma as reasons for the delay.
Finding of the Court:
The trial court found the victim's testimony credible and consistent, supported by medical evidence. The court dismissed the defense's claims of contradictions and lack of injury, emphasizing the psychological impact of sexual assault on the victim. The court also rejected the defense's argument of false implication, considering the heinous nature of the crime and societal repercussions for the victim.
Issues: The court addressed the delay in reporting, the credibility of the victim's testimony, the significance of medical evidence, and the implications of the accused in a false case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the credibility of the victim's testimony, the psychological impact of sexual assault, and the significance of medical evidence in establishing the crime. The court also rejected the defense's argument of false implication, considering the heinous nature of the crime and societal repercussions for the victim.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal, confirming the conviction and sentences of imprisonment imposed by the trial court. The court also directed the trial court to determine victim compensation in accordance with the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and Rules, 2020.
JUDGMENT :
K. LAKSHMAN, J.
1. Heard Mr. A. Prabhakar Rao, learned counsel for appellants-accused Nos. 1 and 2 and Mr. Muthyala Muralidhar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent.
2. This appeal is filed challenging the judgment dated 28.03.2014 in Special S.C. No. 3 of 2013 passed by learned Special Judge for Trial of Cases under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act-cum-I Additional Sessions Judge, Warangal (for short ‘trial Court’).
3. The appellants herein are arraigned accused Nos. 1 and 2 in the aforesaid Special S.C. No. 3 of 2013, respectively. Therefore, for the sake of convenience, the parties will be hereinafter referred to as they were arraigned in Special S.C. No. 3 of 2013.
4. Vide the aforesaid judgment, learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellants-accused Nos. 1 and 2 for the offences punishable under Sections - 366, 376D and 506 read with 34 of IPC [Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013] and Section - 5 (g) read with 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and accordingly imposed life imprisonment on them and other punishments mentioned therein.
5. The case of the prosecution is as follows:
(i) PW-1, victim girl, aged 15 years and complainant, while PWs. 2 and 3 are her parents and PW-4 is her sister-in-law. They are resident of Nagaram Village, whereas accused Nos. 1 and 2 also hail from the very same village. Accused No. 1 is the son-in-law of PW-5, maternal aunt of the victim girl and related to victim girl i.e. brother-in-law.
(ii) Accused Nos. 1 and 2 kept an evil eye over PW-1 victim girl and waiting for a chance to fulfill their sexual lust over her;
(iii) On 14.03.2013, PW-2 and LW-4, brother of the victim girl, went to Vemulawada Temple leaving the victim girl and her father (PW-3) in the house. Accused came to know the same and taken an opportunity to fulfill their desire.
(iv) Accordingly, on 15.03.2023 night at about 22:00 hours, PW-3 went to agricultural fields for watering so saying the victim girl to sleep in her Aunt’s house (PW-5). The victim girl went to the house of PW-5 and while she was sleeping, taking the same as advantage on the same day night i.e. 15/16.03.2013 at about 0100 hours, accused Nos. 1 and 2 went to PW-3, offered him a quarter bottle and made him consume liquor heavily and sent him to his agricultural field.
(v) Later, accused Nos. 1 and 2 went to PW-5’s house on their motorcycle bearing registration No. AP-36-AF-7039 (Splendor Plus), woke up her and informed that the father of the victim girl had consumed liquor heavily and is making nuisance by consuming liquor and said that they are not finding their house keys.
(vi) Accordingly, accused Nos. 1 and 2 told lies and said PW-5 to send the victim girl with them and took her to their house on their motorcycle, made her to open the lock of their house, took her into their house and threatened her to kill if she discloses the matter to anybody.
(vii) Accused Nos. 1 and 2 gagged clothes in her mouth, laid her on the cot, torn her Punjabi dress, forcibly removed her underwear and accused No. 1 committed rape on her. While accused No. 1 was raping her, accused No. 2 stood outside of the house watching arrival of anybody. Then, accused No. 1 said his friend, accused No. 2 to rape the minor girl. Accordingly, accused No. 2 also committed rape on the victim girl.
(viii) After committing rape on PW-1, accused Nos. 1 and 2 threatened her to kill with dire consequences if she complains the matter to anybody and left away from their house.
(ix) On the same day, when PW-3 came and slept in the house in late night hours, she did not inform the incident to him.
(x) On 17.03.2013, when PW-2, LW-4 and PW-6, mother, brother and sister-in-law, respectively, returned from Vemulawada Temple, PW-1 informed them about the rape committed by the accused on her. On that, her family members brought PW-1 to the police station and lodged Ex.P1 - complaint, and the same was registered as a case in Crime N
Onus of prosecution cannot be discharged by referring to very strong suspicion and existence of highly suspicious facts to inculpate accused nor falsity of defence could take place of proof which pro....
The court affirmed that the victim's testimony, corroborated by medical evidence, is sufficient for conviction in rape cases, even with minor inconsistencies.
Testimony of a child victim, if found consistent and credible, outweighs contradictory medical evidence even in the absence of physical injury. A reasonable explanation for the delay in filing a comp....
The victim's testimony, even without corroboration, can be sufficient for conviction in cases of sexual assault, and the presumption of guilt under the POCSO Act can be applied.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the immateriality of the minor victim's consent in a rape case and the lack of requirement for corroboration in cases of sexual assault when the....
The testimony of a victim in a rape case can be sufficient for conviction, and delays in reporting do not automatically undermine credibility, particularly in cases involving minors.
The victim's consistent statement, medical evidence, and corroborating witness testimonies are crucial in establishing the occurrence of the crime and the victim's age, even in the absence of eyewitn....
Conviction in cases of minor sexual assault can rest solely on the victim's credible testimony without corroboration.
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
