SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(TEL) 20997

HIGH COURT OF TELANGANA
K.SURENDER, J
Guguloth Lachiram – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
CRLA/919/2023



The conviction of a defendant in sexual assault cases relies heavily on the credibility of the victim's testimony and the necessity for corroborative evidence, particularly in serious offenses.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 452, 376(2)(n), 376-DA - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Sections 5(g)(j)(1), 6 - Conviction for sexual assault against a minor - Appellant sentenced to five years for house trespass and 20 years for penetrative sexual assault, sentences to run concurrently. (Paras 1, 23)

(B) Credibility of victim's testimony - The court emphasized that the solitary testimony of the victim can suffice for conviction if credible, yet corroboration is often necessary in serious cases. (Paras 9, 21)

(C) Corroboration standards - The Supreme Court's guidelines highlight that the victim's testimony must be consistent and supported by additional evidence to ensure a safe conviction. (Paras 14, 20)

Facts of the case:
The appellant was accused of repeatedly raping a 13-year-old girl, resulting in pregnancy. The assaults were allegedly committed during the absence of the victim's parents, with the case reported six months later. (Paras 3, 4)

Findings of Court:
The court found insufficient evidence to conclusively prove the appellant's guilt, leading to the acquittal of the accused. (Paras 21, 23)

Issues: The main issues involved the credibility of the victim's testimony, the need for corroborative evidence, and the circumstances surrounding the delay in reporting. (Paras 20, 22)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that while a victim's testimony can be sufficient, in this case, the inconsistencies and lack of corroboration raised reasonable doubt regarding the appellant's guilt. (Paras 20, 22)

Result: Criminal Appeal allowed; appellant acquitted.

JUDGMENT:

1. The appellant/accused was convicted for the offences under Sections 452 , 376 (2)(n) & (3), 376-DA of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5(g)(j)(1) r/w.sec.6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 . The appellant was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence under Section 452 of the Indian Penal code and to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of 20 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offence under Section 5(1) read with Section 6 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012. Both the sentences shall run concurrently. In view of Section 42 of the POCSO Act, since the accused is sentenced for the offence under Section 5(1) read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act, no separate sentence is passed for the offence under Section 376(2)(n) of the IPC .

2. Heard Sri J.Azad Chendra Shekar, learned counsel for the appellant/accused and Sri B.Sudhakar Reddy & Neeraja Reddy, learned counsel for R2 and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for R1.

3. It is a case involving a minor victim girl, under the age of 14 years, allegedly assaulted sexually by Children in Conflict with Law (CCL), identified as JICL.1 and JICL.2 (Juvenile in Conflict with Law) and accused No.1 (appellant herein). The offence occurred over an year at the house of victim, Jamathanda Village. It was reported on 22.08.2022 at 9.00 p.m. by PW.1- complainant who is the mother of the victim-PW.2.

4. The victim, a minor girl aged about 13 years and the eldest daughter of PW.1, was studying in IV class. On 15.08.2022, PW.1’s husband brought PW.2-victim, home to celebrate the ‘Teej’ festival. After the celebration, PW.1 noticed that PW.2 appeared weak and took her to a local RMP-PW.3 who, after preliminary examination, advised taking PW.2 to a hospital. Following his advice, PW.1 took PW.2 to Dr.Yadagiri Reddy’s hospital-PW.4 at Thorrur, where it was revealed that PW.2 was five months pregnant. Upon inquiry, PW.2 informed that during the lockdown period, their neighbor, JICL-1, who is the son of her paternal uncle, had allegedly committed forcible rape on her in the absence of PW.1 and her husband-LW.2. JICL-1 allegedly disclosed his act of penetrative sexual assault on PW.2 to JICL-2, who is his paternal uncle’s grandson. Taking advantage of this information, JICL-2 allegedly threatened PW.2 and raped her, multiple times. Approximately, six months ago, the appellant/A1 noticing the repeated assaults by JICL-1 and JICL-2 on PW.2, allegedly threatened her, stating that he would expose the incidents and publicly humiliate her. Appellant/A1, subsequently raped PW.2, multiple times, in the absence of her parents at their house. Fearing that the matter would harm their family’s reputation, PW.1 and her husband delayed reporting the incident. After consulting with family members, PW.1 lodged a complaint.

5. During the course of investigation, PW.9-SDPO, considering the nature of the complaint, sent PW.2 to Bharosa Centre, Mahabubabad, along with PW.1 for recording her statement. PW.8- Sub-Inspector of Police recorded PW.2’s statement and then sent her for medical examination. Medical Officer-PW.7 Dr.Jyothsna, conducted the examination of PW.2. During investigation on 23.08.2022, PW.9 visited the scene of offence at the house of PW.1 and her husband, in the presence of panchas PW.5 and LW.7. PW.9 examined the scene and panchanama was drafted. PW.9 collected PW.2’s date of birth certificate from PW.6-Principal of Sacred Heart English Medium School, Nellikuru, and found that PW.2’s date of birth is 14.06.2010 and that she was 12 years, 2 months and 10 days old on the date of complaint and below 12 years at the time of the offence.

6. On 24.08.2022, PW.9 received credible information about JICL- 1 and JICL-2’s presence at their homes in Jadu Thanda Village, Nellikudur. PW.9 proceeded to their homes, found them with their parents, and had their fathers hand

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top