9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
- Appeal against judgment and order of conviction under sections 376(2)(g) I.P.C. - Consideration of evidences by lower courts. - Applicability of Section 114(A) of the Evidence Act. - Defense pleas and their rejection. - Revision case in the High Court of Orissa. - Corroboration of victim's testimony. - Legal observations on corroboration in rape cases. - Discrepancies in evidence and defense arguments. - Exercise of revisional power by the High Court. - Upholding of conviction and sentence by the Supreme Court. Analysis: The Supreme Court heard an appeal against the judgment and order of conviction under section 376(2)(g) I.P.C. The prosecution case involved the appellants forcibly taking the victim girl to a lonely house, where they sexually assaulted her. The lower courts convicted the appellants based on the victim's testimony and rejected their defense pleas. The Assistant Sessions Judge convicted the appellants under section 376(2)(g) I.P.C. and sentenced them to three years of rigorous imprisonment, considering their young age. The appellants appealed to the First Additional Sessions Judge, who affirmed the conviction, leading to a further appeal in the High Court of Orissa. In the High Court, the evidence of various witnesses, including the victim girl and her family members, was considered. The court found that the accused persons committed rape on the victim girl forcibly without her consent. Despite some witnesses turning hostile, their testimonies corroborated crucial aspects of the prosecution's case. The High Court emphasized the importance of the victim's testimony in rape cases, highlighting the reluctance of victims in a traditional society to report such incidents due to fear of social stigma. The defense attempted to challenge the victim's testimony based on minor discrepancies and alleged enmity. However, the courts found the defense's case unsubstantiated and upheld the conviction based on the victim's consistent account. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the conviction and sentence imposed by the High Court. The Court reiterated the principle that the High Court's revisional power should only be exercised in exceptional cases where there is a manifest error resulting in a miscarriage of justice. Ultimately, the Supreme Court upheld the conviction and sentence, emphasizing the importance of not re-appraising evidence in the face of concurrent findings by lower courts. The judgment highlighted the significance of the victim's testimony in rape cases and the legal principles regarding corroboration in such sensitive matters. This comprehensive analysis of the judgment showcases the progression of the case through the legal system, the evaluation of evidence, the rejection of defense arguments, and the final decision by the Supreme Court to uphold the conviction and sentence imposed by the High Court of Orissa.
|
