The Tripura High Court confirmed the order of conviction under Section 376. It held that there were no discrepancies in the testimony of the victim over the course of trial and the defence failed to record any contradictions in the testimony of the victim.

Thus there was no reason to disbelieve the credibility of the victim. The conviction can be sustained without any further corroboration based on the sole testimony of the victim and her mother.

Brief Facts:

The victim, a deaf and dumb girl was raped by the accused when she went to fetch water from a tube well, as a result of which she became pregnant. The case under Section Section 376(2)(I) IPC was lodged against the accused when the mother of the victim became aware of the incident. The trial court convicted the accused under Section 376(2)(I) of IPC and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment of ten years along with a fine which has been challenged in the present appeal.

Contentions of the Applicant:

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt and the trial court came to its conclusion only based on evidence of the victim and her mother. It was further argued that the mere statement of the victim should not always be considered as gospel truth and the impugned judgment should thus be set aside.

Contentions of the Respondent:

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the state argued that the prosecution had successfully proven its case and that the sole testimony of the prosecutrix can be the basis of convicting the accused. It was further argued that the victim and her mother were vital witnesses and their testimonies thus completely inspired confidence.

Observations of the Court:

The court after going through the facts and evidence stated that the victim was a deaf and dumb lady and her mother after seeing her physical appearance suspected that something was wrong she came to know about the truth upon the query and thus the victim here was not an accomplice. It was further stated that her evidence is to be considered at par as an injured witness of an occurrence and it is a settled position that if the sole evidence of the prosecutrix inspires confidence, the Court is not required to seek corroboration for recording a conviction.

It was further observed that the victim had identified the accused while pointing fingers at him and was well aware of the identity of the accused. It was further stated that if such kind of offence like a commission of rape had not occurred, a deaf and dumb lady of growing age would not have come forward to tell a lie against her close relative which has been substantially corroborated by the mother of the victim and inspires confidence and is true being spontaneous and natural. It was further stated that it is no more res integra that conviction can be based upon the testimony of a solitary witness if it is found to be trustworthy, without any blemish and inspires the confidence of the court.

The court observed that there were no discrepancies in the testimony of the victim over the course of the trial and the defence failed to record any contradictions in the testimony of the victim thus there was no reason to disbelieve the credibility of the victim and the conviction can be sustained without any further corroboration based on the sole testimony of the victim and her mother.

The decision of the Court:

The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the impugned order of conviction under Section 376(2)(I) IPC.

Case Title: Sudesh Tripura vs State of Tripura

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arindam Lodh

Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL (J) 05 OF 2023

Advocate for the Applicant: Mr. Arjun Acharjee, Mr. P.J. Ghosh and Ms. Shreya Sarkar

Advocate for the Respondent: Mr. Sumit Debnath

Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com

Picture Source :

 
Kritika