SANDEEP MEHTA, PRASANNA B. VARALE
Lok Mal @ Loku – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent
What is the evidentiary value of the prosecutrix's testimony in a rape case and whether conviction can be based on sole testimony? What is the impact of absence of injuries on the private parts of the victim on the prosecution’s case in rape? What considerations govern the delay in lodging a report/FIR and its effect on the prosecution in rape cases?
Key Points: - The prosecutrix’s testimony in a rape case is of the same value as an injured witness and can sustain a conviction on sole testimony. (!) (!) - Absence of injuries on the victim’s private parts is not necessarily fatal to the prosecution; it depends on the facts and circumstances of the case. (!) - Delay in lodging complaints and registering FIR can be explained and is not automatically fatal to the prosecution’s case. (!) - The court reaffirmed that the prosecutrix’s testimony, if trustworthy and unshaken, can form the basis of conviction without corroboration. (!) (!) - The appellant’s defense of false implication and character attacks on the prosecutrix’s mother were not accepted; the conviction was affirmed. (!) (!) - The judgment directs remission consideration for the accused in accordance with state policy within four weeks due to the age of the incident. (!)
JUDGMENT :
PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.
1. The present criminal appeal arises out of a judgment and order dated 22nd July 2010 passed by High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench in Crl. Appeal No. 496 of 1986. By the impugned judgment and order, the conviction which was rendered by the trial court under Section 376, 323 Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter being referred to as ‘IPC’) was affirmed by the High Court and a sentence of 5 years rigorous imprisonment under Section 376 IPC and 6 months rigorous imprisonment under Section 323 IPC imposed by the trial court was confirmed.
BRIEF FACTS
2. The factual matrix of the case is that on 19.03.1984 at 9.30 A.M, the prosecutrix went to take tuition classes for the girls at the house of the accused. It was stated that out of the two girls. One went to the bathroom and the other was sent by the accused for bringing water. It was further stated that when she was engaged in the work on the first floor of the house, the accused entered the room and latched the door from inside and forced her on the bed. The prosecutrix tried to raise an alarm but her mouth was gagged with a piece of cloth. The accused then removed her salwar to make he
State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh
Bharwada Bhoginbhai Hirjibhai v. State of Gujarat (1983) 3 SCC 217 [Para 14] – Relied.
(1) Rape – Evidence of prosecutrix in a case of rape is of same value as that of an injured witness and conviction can be made on the basis of sole testimony of prosecutrix.(2) Rape – Absence of inju....
The evidence of a prosecutrix must be credible and consistent for a conviction in rape cases; contradictions and lack of supporting evidence can lead to acquittal.
Testimony of the prosecutrix in rape cases must inspire confidence; lack of corroboration casts doubt on prosecution's case.
Lack of corroborative medical evidence and absence of injury undermines the prosecution's case in establishing forcible rape.
Gang rape and criminal intimidation – Conviction and sentence cannot be sustained where version of prosecutrix is against natural conduct of the person.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecutrix's testimony to be reliable and corroborated by medical evidence or surrounding circumstances in cases of rap....
Conviction for rape can rely solely on the survivor's testimony if credible, with minor contradictions not undermining its reliability, reflecting the legal principle that corroboration is not strict....
In a rape case accused could be convicted on sole testimony of prosecutrix, if it is capable of inspiring of confidence in mind of court. If version given by prosecutrix is unsupported by any medical....
The sole testimony of the prosecutrix can be a foundation of conviction if trustworthy, but in this case, the evidence was found to be insufficient to prove the charges.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.