9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Corroboration of testimony in rape cases. 2. Evaluation of evidence and minor discrepancies. 3. Sentence reduction based on mitigating circumstances. Summary: Issue 1: Corroboration of Testimony in Rape Cases The central issue addressed is whether corroboration to the testimony of a victim of rape is essential to establish the charge. The Supreme Court reaffirmed that corroboration is not a sine qua non for a conviction in a rape case, as established in Rameshwar v. The State of Rajasthan. The Court emphasized that in the Indian context, refusal to act on the testimony of a victim of sexual assault in the absence of corroboration adds insult to injury. The Court highlighted that the social milieu in India is different from the Western world, and it is rare for a girl or woman in India to make false allegations of sexual assault due to various societal pressures and consequences. Issue 2: Evaluation of Evidence and Minor Discrepancies The evidence provided by P.W. 1 and P.W. 2 was considered credible and worthy of acceptance. The Court noted that minor discrepancies in the evidence should not be given undue importance as they do not go to the root of the matter. The Court outlined several reasons why minor discrepancies occur, such as differences in observation, memory, and the psychological state of the witness during testimony. The Court refused to reappraise the evidence based on these minor discrepancies and upheld the concurrent findings of the Sessions Court and the High Court. Issue 3: Sentence Reduction Based on Mitigating Circumstances The appellant was found guilty of sexual misbehavior with two young girls and was convicted for the offences of wrongful confinement (u/s 342 IPC), outraging the modesty of women (u/s 354 IPC), and attempt to commit rape (u/s 376 read with Sec. 511 IPC). The Court considered the appellant's loss of job, the passage of time since the incident, and the societal humiliation suffered by the appellant as mitigating factors. Consequently, the Court reduced the substantive sentence for the offence u/s 376 read with Sec. 511 IPC from 2-1/2 years' R.I. to 15 months' R.I., while maintaining the sentence of fine and the sentences for the offences u/s 342 and u/s 354 IPC. The appeal was dismissed with the modification in the sentence. Conclusion: The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, emphasizing the credibility of the victim's testimony in sexual assault cases without the necessity of corroboration, addressing the evaluation of minor discrepancies in evidence, and reducing the sentence based on mitigating circumstances. The appellant was ordered to surrender to undergo the modified sentence.
|
