Case Note & Summary
The case involves two appeals against the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Amravati, convicting the appellants under Sections 366A and 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecutrix, an 11-year-old girl, was returning from her sister's house on December 12, 2010, when the appellants accosted her near government quarters of Irvin Hospital. They forcibly took her to a septic tank and committed gang rape. The FIR was lodged promptly, and medical examination confirmed recent sexual intercourse. The trial court convicted both appellants, sentencing them to seven years for abduction and ten years for gang rape. The appellants challenged the conviction, arguing that the prosecutrix's testimony was unreliable and that there were contradictions. The High Court, however, found the prosecutrix's evidence to be credible, consistent, and corroborated by medical evidence and the prompt FIR. The court held that the testimony of a prosecutrix, if trustworthy, does not require corroboration. The appeals were dismissed, and the conviction and sentences were upheld.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Gang Rape - Section 376(2)(g) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Corroboration of Prosecutrix - The testimony of the prosecutrix, if found credible and trustworthy, does not require corroboration as a matter of law. In the present case, the prosecutrix's evidence was consistent, reliable, and corroborated by medical evidence and prompt FIR. Held that conviction under Section 376(2)(g) was proper (Paras 1-10). B) Criminal Law - Abduction of Minor - Section 366A Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Ingredients - The prosecution must prove that the accused induced the minor to go with them with intent that she may be forced or seduced to illicit intercourse. The evidence showed that the appellants forcibly took the 11-year-old prosecutrix to a secluded spot and committed gang rape. Held that all ingredients of Section 366A were satisfied (Paras 1-10). C) Evidence Law - Testimony of Child Witness - Credibility - The prosecutrix, aged 11 years, gave consistent and coherent evidence. Her testimony was corroborated by medical evidence showing recent sexual intercourse and injuries. The trial court's reliance on her evidence was justified. Held that the conviction was based on sound evidence (Paras 1-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellants under Sections 366A and 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code is sustainable based on the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Both appeals are dismissed. The conviction and sentences imposed by the trial court are confirmed.
Law Points
- Gang rape
- Abduction of minor
- Corroboration of prosecutrix testimony
- Medical evidence in sexual offences
- Section 366A IPC
- Section 376(2)(g) IPC
