What is the standard of proof and the admissibility of prosecutrix evidence in rape cases as discussed by the Supreme Court in this judgment? What is the Court’s stance on corroboration requirements for prosecutrix testimony in sexual offences involving a police officer as an accused? What are the consequences and reasoning for upholding the conviction and sentencing of a police officer for rape in this case?

Key Points: - The Court held that a prosecutrix in a sex-offence case is a competent witness under Section 118 and need not be corroborated in material particulars in all cases; corroboration is not an absolute requirement except in rare circumstances. (!) (!) (!) - The High Court’s requirement of corroboration for prosecutrix testimony in rape cases was rejected; the Court emphasized not denying credibility to prosecutrix and recognized that in cases involving a police officer, the dignity and vulnerability of the victim must be carefully weighed. (!) (!) (!) - The Court affirmed the trial Court’s conviction under Section 376 IPC and upheld the sentence, stating that a police officer committing rape warrants exemplary punishment and that the High Court’s acquittal was unjustified. (!) (!)

What is the standard of proof and the admissibility of prosecutrix evidence in rape cases as discussed by the Supreme Court in this judgment?

What is the Court’s stance on corroboration requirements for prosecutrix testimony in sexual offences involving a police officer as an accused?

What are the consequences and reasoning for upholding the conviction and sentencing of a police officer for rape in this case?