Trial Court "Failed In Its Duty" To Refer Rape Victim To Compensation Scheme: Delhi HC Directs DSLSA To Award Compensation

The Delhi High Court on Thursday upheld the order of conviction and sentence of a man for the offences of rape and stalking, after observing that the prosecutrix's testimony not only inspired confidence but was reliable, consistent and admissible.

It noted however, that the Trial Court "failed in its duty" to refer the victim to the Delhi Victims Compensation Scheme, 2018 where the minimum compensation for a rape victim is specified at Rs. 4 lakhs and the maximum compensation at Rs.7 lakhs.

Hence, Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri directed thus:

"This Court, therefore, directs the Delhi State Legal Services Authority to consider and award appropriate compensation to the prosecutrix in accordance with the Victim Compensation Scheme within a period of four weeks from passing of this judgment."

Dismissing the appeal by the convict, the High Court also observed that the appellant failed to cause a dent on prosecutrix's testimony which has remained unimpeachable.

"On a conspectus of the entire evidence that has come on record, this Court is of the opinion that the testimony of the prosecutrix about the stalking and offence of rape committed by the appellant upon her not only inspires confidence, but is also held to be consistent, reliable and admissible," the Court observed.

The appellant had challenged the order of conviction and sentence dated 15th October 2020 passed by the trial court.

The facts of the case are that the prosecutrix had alleged that the man had committed rape on her against her wishes after chasing her and her niece on 15th June 2016. After the said incident, the woman had alleged that the man still chased her while they were moving towards their house.

The defence taken by the accused was that on the way, the prosecutrix asked for Rs. 300/-. At that time, he asked the prosecutrix, if he gave her the money, would she have sex with him. The prosecutrix did not answer. After which, he took the prosecutrix to a secluded place in the park where again, he asked her if he could have sex with her. The prosecutrix did not reply. Strangely, when he proposed to the prosecutrix that he would pay her after the sex, she consented.

"This line of defence is not only unbelievable but an afterthought when seen in light of the cross-examination of the prosecutrix, where no such suggestion of payment of Rs. 300/- being asked or promised to be paid, was given," the Court observed.

It added,

"In the present case, the prosecutrix had consistently stated that the appellant had committed rape upon her against her wish. The appellant has failed to cause a dent on her testimony which has remained unimpeachable."

Further, the Court also relied on Section 114-A of the Indian Evidence Act which provides for presumption to be drawn as to absence of consent in certain prosecution for rape and observed that the appellant failed to dislodge the said presumption.

Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed after directing the DSLSA to award compensation to the prosecutrix within four weeks.

Case Title: RANJEET NAIK v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

Click Here To Read Order