2011 (5) TMI 1147 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Age of the prosecutrix.
2. Voluntariness of the prosecutrix's actions.
3. Role of co-accused (A.2 and A.3).
4. Reliability of evidence and documents.

Summary:

1. Age of the Prosecutrix:
The primary issue was determining the age of the prosecutrix, Shankari (PW.4). The prosecution presented multiple documents, including a birth certificate from the Municipality and a school certificate, both indicating her date of birth as 30.3.1984, making her 14 years old at the time of the incident. The defense argued that Shankari was about 18 years old based on a radiological test report by Dr. K. Gururaj (PW.20). However, the court relied on the birth certificate and school records, which were admissible u/s 35 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and corroborated by the testimony of Shankari's mother, Parimala (PW.15). The court concluded that Shankari was a minor at the time of the incident.

2. Voluntariness of the Prosecutrix's Actions:
The defense contended that Shankari voluntarily went with A.1, Murugan @ Settu, as she was in love with him and wanted to marry him. They presented a letter (Ex. D-1) written by Shankari expressing her love for A.1 and stating that she left with him willingly. However, the court found that the letter did not hold significant weight against the documentary evidence proving her minority.

3. Role of Co-Accused (A.2 and A.3):
The trial court convicted A.2 and A.3 u/s 366 r/w 109 IPC. The High Court modified their conviction to u/s 363 r/w 109 IPC, reducing their sentence to two years of rigorous imprisonment. The Supreme Court upheld this modification, finding no reason to interfere with the High Court's decision.

4. Reliability of Evidence and Documents:
The defense questioned the reliability of the birth certificate and school records, arguing that the name of the prosecutrix was not mentioned in the birth certificate and that her parents were unsure about her exact age. The court dismissed these arguments, stating that the birth certificate and school records were made ante litem motam and were thus reliable. The court also referenced previous judgments (e.g., Mohd. Ikram Hussain v. State of U.P., AIR 1964 SC 1625) to support the admissibility and probative value of such documents.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, affirming the convictions and sentences of the appellants. The court emphasized the reliability of the documentary evidence proving the prosecutrix's minority and found no merit in the defense's arguments regarding voluntariness and the roles of the co-accused. The appellants were ordered to surrender within 30 days to serve the remaining part of their sentences.