Case Note & Summary
The case involves two appeals: one by the State of Maharashtra seeking enhancement of sentence, and one by the accused challenging his conviction. The accused was convicted by the trial court for offences under Sections 376(2)(f) and 377 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for committing rape and unnatural offence on a 3-year-old girl. The incident occurred on 10 October 2011 when the accused, a relative of the victim's father, took the minor girl to her house and sexually assaulted her. The victim's mother and father returned home to find the accused wearing his pants and the victim crying and bleeding. The victim informed her mother about the assault. Medical evidence confirmed injuries to the victim's vagina and anus. The trial court sentenced the accused to 10 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000 on each count, with sentences to run concurrently. The State appealed for enhancement of sentence, while the accused appealed against conviction. The High Court examined the evidence, including the testimony of the child victim, her mother, and medical witnesses. The court found the child's testimony credible and corroborated by medical evidence. The court upheld the conviction under both sections, noting that the child's testimony was reliable and the medical evidence supported the prosecution case. Regarding the sentence, the court held that 10 years rigorous imprisonment was adequate and not disproportionate, and dismissed the State's appeal for enhancement. The court also rejected the accused's appeal against conviction, finding no merit in the arguments. The judgment was delivered by a division bench of the Bombay High Court at Nagpur on 27 February 2019.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape of Minor - Section 376(2)(f) IPC - Testimony of Child Witness - The prosecutrix, a 3-year-old girl, was found credible by the trial court and her testimony was corroborated by medical evidence and the testimony of her mother. The High Court held that the conviction under Section 376(2)(f) IPC is sustainable as the child's testimony was reliable and the medical evidence supported the prosecution case. (Paras 2-10) B) Criminal Law - Unnatural Offence - Section 377 IPC - Corroboration - The medical evidence showed injuries to the anus of the prosecutrix, corroborating the allegation of carnal intercourse against the order of nature. The High Court upheld the conviction under Section 377 IPC. (Paras 2-10) C) Criminal Law - Sentence Enhancement - Section 377 CrPC - Adequacy of Sentence - The State appealed for enhancement of sentence, but the High Court found that the sentence of 10 years rigorous imprisonment was adequate and not disproportionate to the gravity of the offence. The appeal for enhancement was dismissed. (Paras 11-12)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the accused under Sections 376(2)(f) and 377 IPC is sustainable, and whether the sentence of 10 years rigorous imprisonment requires enhancement.
Final Decision
Both appeals dismissed. Conviction under Sections 376(2)(f) and 377 IPC upheld. Sentence of 10 years rigorous imprisonment on each count, to run concurrently, confirmed. State's appeal for enhancement dismissed.
Law Points
- Testimony of a child witness can be relied upon if found credible
- even without corroboration
- Conviction under Section 376(2)(f) IPC for rape of a minor below 12 years
- Conviction under Section 377 IPC for unnatural offence
- Sentence of 10 years RI is adequate and not requiring enhancement
