Corroboration From Independent Witnesses Not Necessary: Telangana HC Upholds Conviction In Rape Case
The Telangana High Court observed that when there is convincing evidence of a rape victim, corroboration from independent witnesses isn't necessary.
The Bench confirmed the conviction recorded by the trial Court under Section 376 of the IPC. The Court found the victim's testimony to be convincing and supported by medical evidence as well.
A Single Bench of Justice K. Surender observed, “Further, when the evidence of PW1 is convincing and medical evidence is corroborating with the version given by PW1 regarding the physical assault and also commission of rape, there is no necessity to seek corroboration from any independent witnesses as argued by the counsel for the appellant.”
Advocate J.K. Ranjit Kumar represented the appellant, while APP Suresh Goud appeared for the respondent.
An FIR was filed by the family of the victim, a class 10th student, which alleged that the appellant, a neighbor and tailor by profession, forcibly took her into his shop and committed rape upon her. The victim’s testimony detailed the physical and verbal abuse inflicted by the appellant, leading to injuries and trauma. Subsequently, she reported the incident to her family, who filed a complaint at the police station.
The trial court found favour with the version of the victim and consequently convicted the appellant under Sections 376 and 323 of the IPC. The appellant challenged the same before the High Court.
The appellant pointed out there was a delay in lodging the FIR. Secondly, there was no corroboration through any independent witnesses despite the incident occurring in a busy area. Lastly, they sought a reversal of the conviction on account of the discrepancies and lacunae in the prosecution case.
The Court noted that the victim had specifically narrated regarding the incident of rape that was committed on her by using physical force. “The victim was sent to the hospital for the purpose of medical examination. The doctor found that there is an injury which is an abrasion of both lips. Vaginal smears were also taken, placed on glass slides and sent for examination. Human semen and spermatozoa were detected,” the Court added.
The Court also observed that the victim was traumatised after the incident and she informed about it on the next day to her maternal uncle and her parents. The family filed an FIR the very next day. “In the said background, the delay of one day is clearly explained,” the Court noted.
“Even accepting that the shop was in a busy place, according to the victim she was assaulted and she lost consciousness for some time. In the said circumstances, when it is not the case of the accused that at the time when the alleged assault or dragging the victim into the shop, there were any neighbours or anyone else present, the argument that independent witnesses were not examined by the Police during the investigation, does not hold water. Court cannot assume that people were present and that they were not examined, unless stated by witnesses,” the Court remarked.
Consequently, the Court stated that “there are no grounds to interfere with the conviction and finding of the trial Court for the offence of rape and assault punishable under Sections 376 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code which oral evidence is supported by medical evidence”
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the appeal.
Cause Title: Shaik Mohammed Khasim @ Khashu v. The State of A.P.
