Case Note & Summary
The appellant was convicted by the Special POCSO Court, Nagpur, for the rape of his minor stepdaughter, resulting in her pregnancy and childbirth. He appealed to the High Court challenging the conviction and sentence of life imprisonment. The victim, aged 14 years, lived with her mother and the appellant, who was her mother's husband and whom she called 'father'. The appellant repeatedly raped her when her mother went to work and her sister was at school. The victim concealed the abuse out of fear due to threats from the appellant. She disclosed only after her menstrual cycle stopped and a sonography revealed a seven-month pregnancy. She gave birth to a female child on 02-03-2016. DNA analysis confirmed the appellant as the biological father. The defense argued lack of cogent evidence regarding the victim's age, inordinate delay in filing the FIR, discrepancies in the victim's and her mother's testimonies, and unreliable medical/DNA evidence because samples were allegedly not properly collected from the appellant. The prosecution maintained that the victim's testimony was of sterling quality and corroborated by medical and DNA evidence. The High Court rejected all defense contentions. It held that the victim's age was sufficiently proved by her birth certificate and her mother's testimony, which went unchallenged. The court noted that the delay in lodging the FIR was explained by the victim's fear and did not weaken the prosecution case. Applying settled law that conviction for rape can rest solely on the credible testimony of the victim without any corroboration, the court found the victim's deposition clear, cogent, and unshaken in cross-examination. Moreover, the DNA evidence conclusively proved paternity and the integrity of the sample collection process was established through multiple prosecution witnesses. The court relied on precedents including Sham Singh vs State of Haryana and State of Punjab vs Gurmit Singh. Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for life under Section 376(2)(f), (i), (n) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, along with the fine imposed.
Headnote
A) Protection of Children from Sexual Offences - Age of Victim - Proof of Age - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Section 2(d) - The appellant contended that the prosecution had not led cogent evidence to prove the victim was a child. The victim produced a birth certificate (Exh.22) and her mother confirmed it; medical evidence supported minority. No challenge was raised to this evidence. Held that the victim was established as a child under Section 2(d) of the POCSO Act enabling prosecution thereunder (Paras 10-11). B) Criminal Procedure - Delay in Lodging FIR - Effect on Prosecution Case - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - The appellant argued that the FIR was lodged after seven months of pregnancy, causing an inordinate delay. The victim explained she was scared due to threats from the appellant and disclosed only when her menstruation stopped. Held that the delay was explained and did not cast doubt on the prosecution case (Paras 4, 14). C) Criminal Law - Rape - Testimony of Victim - Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Conviction for rape can be based on the sole testimony of the victim if it inspires confidence and is of sterling quality; corroboration is not necessary. The court applied this principle from Sham Singh vs State of Haryana, (2018) 18 SCC 34 and other precedents. The victim gave a clear and cogent account of repeated sexual intercourse by the appellant, her stepfather, and was not shaken in cross-examination. Held that her testimony was reliable and sufficient to sustain the conviction (Paras 12-15). D) Criminal Law - Medical and Forensic Evidence - DNA Profiling - Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - The appellant contested the collection and integrity of blood and DNA samples. The prosecution examined witnesses including the chemical analyzer (PW-7) who detailed the process and concluded the appellant and victim were the biological parents of the child. No material contradictions emerged in cross-examination. Held that the DNA evidence provided conclusive corroboration of the victim's testimony (Paras 17-18).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the prosecution proved the victim's age as a child under POCSO Act; whether the delay in lodging FIR is fatal; whether the testimony of the victim (PW-2) is credible and sufficient for conviction; whether the medical and DNA evidence is reliable; whether the sentence imposed is excessive
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for life under Section 376(2)(f),(i),(n) IPC and Section 6 POCSO Act, finding the victim's testimony credible and corroborated by DNA evidence.
Law Points
- conviction for rape can be based solely on victim's testimony if it inspires confidence
- corroboration not required
- minor discrepancies not fatal
- DNA evidence admissible and reliable
- age of victim proved by birth certificate and mother's testimony
- no infirmity in medical evidence
