Recently, the Chhattisgarh High Court dismissed the criminal appeal and upheld the conviction of the appellant under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The Court held that the prosecution proved the case beyond a reasonable doubt, and the victim’s consistent testimony, coupled with documentary proof of her age, was sufficient for conviction.
Brief Facts:
The appellant was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge for committing repeated sexual assault on a minor girl aged 16 years. The victim remained silent out of fear until the appellant abused her mother over the phone, after which she disclosed everything and filed a complaint. The FIR was registered under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act. During the investigation, the police seized documents, conducted medical examinations of both parties, and submitted the chargesheet under multiple provisions, including the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The trial court convicted the appellant under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and sentenced him to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment.
Contentions of the Appellant:
The learned counsel for the appellant argued that the case was based on a delayed complaint (40 days) and suffered from contradictions in the prosecution's evidence. It was further contended that the age of the victim was not conclusively proven and that the medical report did not support the charge of rape. Additionally, the victim's statement under Section 164 CrPC was not exhibited, and no physical injuries were found on her body.
Contentions of the Respondent:
The State counsel supported the trial court’s judgment, arguing that the conviction was based on reliable testimony and corroborative documentary evidence. It was submitted that the trial court had properly appreciated the victim’s testimony, the documentary proof of age, and other supporting evidence to reach its conclusion.
Observations of the Court:
The Court noted that the Court shoulders a great responsibility while trying an accused on charges of rape. They must deal with such cases with utmost sensitivity. The Courts should examine the broader probabilities of a case and not get swayed by minor contradictions or insignificant discrepancies in the statement of the victim, which are not of a fatal nature, to throw out an otherwise reliable prosecution case.
The Court observed that if, for some reason, the Court is hesitant to place implicit reliance on the testimony of the victim, it may look for evidence that may lend assurance to her testimony short of the corroboration required in the case of an accomplice. The court said that if a victim is an adult and of full understanding, the Court is entitled to base a conviction on her evidence unless the same is known to be infirm and not trustworthy. If the totality of the circumstances appearing on the record of the case discloses that the victim does not have a strong motive to falsely involve the person charged, the Court should ordinarily have no hesitation in accepting her evidence.
Decision of the Court:
The Chhattisgarh High Court, dismissing the appeal, held that the prosecution has been successful in proving its case beyond reasonable doubt
Case Title: Raushan @ Vicky Patel vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Coram: Hon’ble Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Hon’ble Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi
Case No.: CRA No. 1071 of 2023
Advocate for the Appellants: Ms. Sareena Khan
Advocate for the Respondent: Mr. Hariom Rai
Picture Source :
