“Requires Courage To Report Sexual Assault Even Today, What About 25 Yrs Back”: Delhi High Court On Omission In Survivor's Testimony
The Delhi High Court has observed that courts must remain conscious of the social stigma, fear of ostracisation and societal pressure faced by women while assessing their testimony in sexual assault cases, particularly that took place decades ago.Justice Vimal Kumar Yadav remarked that even today, reporting sexual assault requires considerable courage, “what to talk about 25 years...
The Delhi High Court has observed that courts must remain conscious of the social stigma, fear of ostracisation and societal pressure faced by women while assessing their testimony in sexual assault cases, particularly that took place decades ago.
Justice Vimal Kumar Yadav remarked that even today, reporting sexual assault requires considerable courage, “what to talk about 25 years back.”
The Court made the observations while upholding the conviction of a man for offences under Sections 324, 354 and 506 IPC in a 2001 case involving assault and attempted sexual violence against a woman in a village in Delhi.
Appellant argued that the survivor's testimony contained material “improvements” because, in her initial complaint, she had not mentioned that the string of her salwar had been broken during the assault. It was contended that this omission rendered her testimony doubtful.
Rejecting the argument, the High Court accepted the survivor's explanation that she had refrained from disclosing the detail earlier out of shame.
“As regards the so called improvement, there is a clarification in cross-examination itself of PW-2, as to why and under what circumstances, it so happened. She has stated that out of shame she did not disclose this fact…which is perfectly justifiable,” the Court observed.
The Court further emphasised that the incident had occurred nearly 25 years ago in a rural setting where women continued to observe parda.
“One can easily visualize the position of the female folk and their conduct, social norms, fear of ostracization and social stigma etc. attached with any kind of offence. It require some courage to report such like matters even today, what to talk about 25 years back,” the Court said.
The High Court also held that the survivor's testimony was corroborated by medical evidence showing abrasions, swelling, bite marks and other injuries consistent with her account of being dragged into a field and assaulted.
While affirming the conviction, the Court reduced the sentence considering that the incident occurred in 2001, when he was barely out of teenage.
Appearance: Mr. Sunita Arora, Adv. (DHCLSC) with Appellant-in-person; Mr. Nawal Kishore Jha, APP for State with Ms. Kalpana Jha and Mr. Siddharth Shankar Jha, Advs. Ms. Megha Singh, Advocate for prosecutrix.
Case title: Manoj Kumar v. State
Case no.: CRL.A. 703/2008