Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Gourav Narendra Singh, was convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, in Sessions Case No.500 of 2013 for offences punishable under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. He was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and a fine of Rs.2,00,000/- for rape, and rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and a fine of Rs.50,000/- for criminal intimidation, with default sentences. The sentences were to run concurrently. The appellant, who is the cousin brother of the prosecutrix (a minor aged 13 years at the time of the incident), allegedly sexually assaulted her on multiple occasions between February 2012 and September 2012. The prosecutrix resided with her maternal grandparents and maternal uncle and aunt. Her grandmother was diagnosed with cancer, and the family often accompanied her to the hospital, leaving the prosecutrix alone at home. The appellant would visit frequently. In February 2012, the appellant took the house key from a neighbour, entered the house, and when the prosecutrix returned from school, he asked for biscuits, pulled her towards him, and sexually assaulted her. He also clicked nude photographs of her and threatened to upload them on the internet if she disclosed the incident. Based on these threats, he continued to sexually assault her over the following months. The prosecutrix eventually disclosed the incident to her aunt, leading to the lodging of an FIR at Santacruz Police Station (Crime No.100 of 2013). The appellant was charged and tried. The trial court convicted him, leading to the present appeal. The High Court examined the evidence, including the testimony of the prosecutrix, medical evidence, and the appellant's failure to cross-examine on material aspects. The court found the prosecutrix's testimony to be consistent, reliable, and corroborated by medical evidence. The delay in lodging the FIR was explained by the threats. The court upheld the conviction and dismissed the appeal.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape - Testimony of Prosecutrix - Section 376 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The court held that the testimony of the prosecutrix, a minor, was consistent, reliable, and corroborated by medical evidence, and the appellant's failure to cross-examine her on material aspects rendered the evidence unchallenged. The conviction was upheld. (Paras 1-21) B) Criminal Law - Criminal Intimidation - Section 506 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The appellant threatened to upload nude photographs of the prosecutrix on the internet, which constituted criminal intimidation. The conviction under Section 506 IPC was upheld. (Paras 1-21) C) Evidence Law - Delay in FIR - Appreciation - The court noted that the delay in lodging the FIR was explained by the prosecutrix's fear due to threats from the appellant, and such delay did not affect the credibility of the prosecution case. (Paras 1-21)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The conviction and sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, in Sessions Case No.500 of 2013 are upheld.
Law Points
- Testimony of prosecutrix in sexual offences
- Corroboration of medical evidence
- Appreciation of evidence in rape cases
- Section 376 IPC
- Section 506 IPC
- Minor victim's testimony
- Delay in lodging FIR
- Failure to cross-examine on material aspects
