Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Deepak Shankarrao Borkar, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Wardha, in Special Case No. 7 of 2012 for offences under Section 376(2)(f) and Section 452 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). He was sentenced to ten years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000 for rape, and one year rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000 for house trespass, with sentences to run concurrently. The incident occurred on 15th October 2011, when the prosecutrix, an eleven-year-old girl, was alone at her home in Andori. Her mother, Sunanda (PW 4), had left for work, and her father was also away. Upon returning, Sunanda found the prosecutrix weeping and was told that the appellant had entered the house, gagged her, removed her clothes, and raped her. Sunanda immediately called her husband and reported the matter to the police. The prosecutrix was medically examined, and the medical report indicated injuries on her hymen and vagina, consistent with sexual assault. The appellant was arrested and charged. The trial court convicted him based on the testimony of the prosecutrix, her mother, and the medical evidence. The appellant appealed to the Bombay High Court, challenging the conviction on the ground that there was no direct evidence of penetration and that the medical report did not conclusively prove rape. The High Court, after examining the evidence, held that the absence of direct evidence of penetration does not vitiate the conviction when the circumstances and medical report clearly establish the offence. The court noted that the prosecutrix's testimony was corroborated by her mother's evidence and the medical report. The court also found that the sentence of ten years rigorous imprisonment was not excessive. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the conviction and sentence were upheld.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Rape of Minor - Circumstantial Evidence - Section 376(2)(f) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Conviction based on circumstantial evidence and medical report is sustainable even in absence of direct evidence of penetration - The prosecutrix, an eleven-year-old girl, was raped by the appellant when she was alone at home. The mother returned to find the child weeping and was informed of the incident. The medical evidence showed injuries on the hymen and vagina, supporting the allegation. The court held that the absence of direct evidence of penetration does not vitiate the conviction when the circumstances and medical report clearly establish the offence (Paras 1-10). B) Criminal Law - House Trespass - Section 452 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Conviction for house trespass with intent to commit rape is sustainable when the accused entered the victim's house and committed rape - The appellant entered the house of the prosecutrix without permission and committed rape, thus the conviction under Section 452 IPC is proper (Para 10). C) Criminal Law - Sentencing - Rape of Minor - Ten years rigorous imprisonment for rape of a minor is not excessive and is in accordance with law - The court found no reason to interfere with the sentence imposed by the trial court (Para 10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 376(2)(f) and Section 452 of the Indian Penal Code is sustainable on the basis of the evidence on record.
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed. Conviction and sentence under Sections 376(2)(f) and 452 IPC upheld.
Law Points
- Conviction for rape can be based on circumstantial evidence and medical report even in absence of direct evidence of penetration
- Testimony of child victim corroborated by mother's evidence and medical report is sufficient to prove guilt
- Sentence of ten years rigorous imprisonment for rape of minor is not excessive
