The Supreme Court of India said that a minor victim’s testimony is reliable and can be used for convicting the accused rapist of a six-year-old girl and upheld the sentence of ten years rigorous imprisonment (RI).
A bench of Justices Arjit Pasayat and P.P Naolekar reasoned that ‘ends of justice would be met,’ by reducing the sentence to five years.
A sessions court in Bihar had earlier convicted and sentenced Md Kalam to ten years RI and imposed a fine of Rs 500 for raping a minor under Section 376 IPC(conviction for rape).
Kalam’s appeal before the Patna High Court was dismissed following which he appealed in the apex court. Kalam pleaded that the two subordinate courts had wrongly convicted him by relying upon the testimony of a child without further corroboration. He also claimed that the sentence was too harsh.
On the other hand the Bihar government submitted that the testimony of a child witness particularly in such a heinous case does not require corroboration, as long as the testimony of the victim is credible.
The government pointed out that the victim had told her mother about the incident immediately after the rape, and therefore her evidence is of considerable importance.
The state argued that since the age of the victim was six years at the time of incident, the appropriate conviction would have been under Section 376 (2)(f) IPC. Under this the maximum permissible sentence is for life imprisonment, with a minimum of ten years rigourous imprisonment.
Upholding the prosecution’s contention, the apex court said the evidence of a child witness cannot be rejected. But the evidence must be evaluated carefully and with greater circumspection because a child is susceptible to outside influence, the bench said.
The court has to assess as to whether the statement of the victim is a voluntary expression and that it was not under the influence of others.
Leave Your Comments