Villagers' Attempts To 'Resolve' Rape Case Through Mediation Explains Delay In Lodging FIR: Jharkhand High Court Upholds Conviction

The Jharkhand High Court recently observed that delay in lodging an FIR in rape cases may be justified where it is shown that local residents first attempted to resolve the matter amicably within the village.

A Single Judge Bench of Justice Arun Kumar Rai was hearing an appeal against the order of the Trial Court whereby the appellant had been convicted under Section 376 IPC and sentenced to seven years of rigorous imprisonment.

As per the prosecution, the victim was 14 years old. On 12.03.2002, she stepped out of her father's shop to relieve herself. At that point, a neighbour caught her, dragged her to a barren piece of land, and committed rape. When some persons started coming towards the spot, the accused fled. The victim later narrated the incident to her mother and aunt. However, an FIR was registered two days later, on 14.03.2002.

Among other submissions, the appellant argued that the medical report had not been proved, as it was brought on record by an advocate's clerk. The Court observed that it appeared improbable that an advocate's clerk would have had the opportunity to identify the handwriting and signature of the doctor. It therefore held that the medical report had not been properly proved during trial, and declined to consider it. The High Court nevertheless reiterated that medical evidence is not sine qua non in rape cases, and that a conviction can be based on the sole testimony of the victim if it inspires confidence.

The appellant also argued that the delay in lodging the FIR created the possibility of manipulation of facts. The High Court disagreed, holding that incidents such as rape in villages and rural parts of India often involve issues of family honour and a reluctance on the part of the victim's family to report the matter to the police. Such hesitation is frequently due to societal pressure, fear of retaliation, and the stigma associated with rape and sexual assault. The Court held:

“36. Rape is a heinous crime with no concept of condonation in our criminal jurisprudence. Yet, in some village societies, locals first attempt resolution by arranging the marriage between the accused and the victim, and if the marriage fails to materialize only then the cases are registered by the victim side…Considering the discussion made in the preceding paragraphs, this Court is of the considered view that in the F.I.R. itself, the victim has stated that, on account of resolving the matter, the villagers convened the meeting immediately after the following day of the incident and thereafter next day also, but as the matter could not be sorted out, she, along with her father, visited the police station to lodge the case, therefore, the delay in lodging an F.I.R is reasonable and sufficiently explained by the circumstances of the case.

The High Court eventually upheld the order of the Trial Court, and convicted the appellant. Top of Form

Bottom of Form

Cause Title: Rabindra Prasad v. State of Jharkhand

Case Number: Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 1816 of 2003

Appearance: Mrs. Neeharika Mazumdar appeared for the appellant. Ms. Kumari Rashmi appeared for the State.

Click Here To Read/Download Order