Case Note & Summary
The State of Maharashtra filed an application under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking leave to appeal against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 10th May 2012 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Khed, District Ratnagiri in Sessions Case No.9 of 2009. The respondent, Shankar Pandurang Kijbile, was acquitted of offences under Sections 376 and 452 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution arose from Crime No.49 of 2008 registered at Guhagar Police Station upon a complaint (Exhibit-21) lodged by the victim (P.W.1) on 22nd November 2008, alleging that the respondent, her brother-in-law, had committed rape and trespass at her house in village Kumbhawane-wadi on the previous day. The trial court, after appreciating the prosecution evidence, acquitted the respondent. The learned APP argued that the trial court erred in discarding the victim's testimony on the ground of lack of corroborative evidence, overlooking that corroboration is not a sine qua non for accepting the evidence of a victim in such offences. She contended that the trial court ought to have accepted the evidence of P.W.1 as corroborated by her husband P.W.2, and that there was no reason for P.W.1 to level such a serious charge against her brother-in-law. The High Court, after hearing the submissions, found that the trial court's approach was perverse and that the victim's testimony was corroborated by her husband. The court held that corroboration is not a mandatory requirement for accepting the testimony of a victim in sexual offences. Accordingly, the court granted leave to appeal and admitted the appeal.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape - Corroboration of Victim's Testimony - Section 376, 452 IPC - Corroboration is not sine qua non for accepting evidence of victim in sexual offences - Trial court acquitted respondent on ground of lack of corroboration, but held that such approach is erroneous - Leave to appeal granted (Paras 1-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court erred in acquitting the respondent by requiring corroboration of the victim's testimony, and whether leave to appeal should be granted.
Final Decision
Leave to appeal granted; appeal admitted.
Law Points
- Corroboration not sine qua non for victim's testimony in rape cases
- Leave to appeal under Section 378(3) CrPC
- Perverse findings of trial court
