A conviction for rape can be based solely on the victim's testimony if it is reliable; absence of corroboration raises doubts about its credibility, warranting acquittal.

ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 06-12-2025

Mr. Amit Kumar Maharaj, learned counsel present in court at the time of hearing agreed to assist this Court as amicus and, therefore, this Court appointed Mr. Amit Kumar Maharaj, as an Amicus Curiae to assist in disposal of present appeal.

2. The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant-convict under Section-374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’) challenging the impugned judgment of conviction dated 20.04.2004 and order of sentence dated 24.04.2004 passed by court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, (Fast-Track) Court No. 5, East Champaran, Motihari in Sessions Trial No. 128 of 1989/59 of 2003, whereby the concerned Trial Court has convicted appellant under Section 376 of the IPC, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and fine of Rs. 3,000/-.

3. The brief facts as per FIR, the victim being a widow lady had been working for the last three years in the house of appellant to sustain herself. About eleven months before the occurrence, accused allegedly grabbed her and committed rape upon her. According to her statement, appellant continued to sexually assault her repeatedly, taking advantage of her vulnerable situation and her financial compulsion to continue working in his house. Out of fear for her social reputation, she initially kept the assaults secret. When she became pregnant, she confronted the accused, who assured her that he would take responsibility for her throughout life. After her child was born and two months had passed, she finally disclosed the entire incident to her grandfather and thereafter panchayat meeting was convened where the accused-appellant was asked to pay ₹3000 on monthly basis and three maunda of paddy as settlement. However, he failed to comply, leading to the matter being reported and forming the basis of the prosecution case.

4. On the basis of aforesaid information, Kalyanpur P.S. Case No. 79 of 1986 was lodged for the offence punishable under Section 376 and 497 of IPC.

5. After completion of investigation the charge- sheet was submitted before the learned Jurisdictional Magistrate, who upon the perusal of material collected during investigation took cognizance of the offence and committed the case before the court of sessions for its trial and disposal.

6. Learned trial court accordingly framed charges on 22.12.1986 against appellant-accused, who upon explanation pleaded as “not guilty” and claimed trial. 7. To substantiate its case, before learned Trial Court the prosecution has examined altogether 4 witnesses.

8. The statement of the appellant-accused was recorded under Section 313 of the Code after stating incriminating evidences/circumstances as surfaced during the trial, which he denied and shows complete innocence.

9. Taking note of the evidence as surfaced during the trial and the arguments as advanced by the parties, the learned Trial Court has convicted appellant-convict for the offences under Section 376 of IPC and sentenced him in the manner as stated above.

10. Being aggrieved with the aforesaid judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the appellant-convict has preferred the present appeal.

11. Hence, the present appeal.

12. It is submitted by Mr. Amit Kumar Maharaj, learned Amicus Curiae that admittedly the informant/ victim is a widow lady and was working with appellant as a domestic help. It is submitted that she is only witness of crime in questions. It is p