'Crime Pierces The Soul Of The Society': Kerala Court Sentences Temple Priest To Life Imprisonment For Rape Of 13Yr Old Stepdaughter

"If the guardians of wards behave in this manner, who will guard the wards?" said a Kerala Court on Saturday while convicting a temple priest for sexually harassing his step-daughter for over a year. Special Judge Saleena VG Nair of the Fast-Track Court in Haripad, Alappuzha District, Kerala, convicted the priest for rape, sexual assault and criminal intimidation under the law, and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. "The sordid episode of the convict stepfather, whose sacred duty was to ensure the protection and welfare of his own daughter like victim, subjected her to gratify his lust in a most cruel and barbaric manner, makes the crime of rape proved even more heinous.The sexual offence committed was not only inhuman and barbaric, but it was a totally ruthless crime of rape and an affront to the human dignity of the society. The savage nature of the crime has shocked my judicial conscience.He was a father figure for the victim. He exploited his control, authority and dominance over the victim. He exploited his domestic relationship and used the victim to satisfy his lust. Hence he deserves no leniency in the matter of punishment.First accused is not entitled for any leniency as he has committed a crime which pierces the soul of the 114 society. The sentencing should be such that it sends a message to the perpetrators of crime and a solace to the tormented," the Judge said. He has been convicted for offences contained under Sections 376(2)(f), 376(2)(i), 376(2)(k) and 376(2)(n), 377, and 506(1) of IPC and 5(n) read with 6, 5 (l) read with 6, 5(i) read with 6, 5(h) read with 6 of PoCSO Act and Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. Background The priest (1st accused) was the step-father of a 13-yr old girl (victim/PW1). The allegation was that he sexually harassed his step-daughter and threatened her that if she divulged his sexual torments to her mother (second accused), he will tell that it was she who touched his private parts and also caused fear in her that her mother will also be arrested and put in jail. It was the prosecution's case that when the victim could not tolerate such repeated sexual harassments and sexual assaults, she informed her torments to her mother. However, her mother told her not to reveal it to anyone and that he is her father and that it's okay. The matter finally came to light when the victim, along with her aunt and a relative lodged a FIR, revealing the sexual abuse inflicted on her by the priest. The FIR was registered against the priest, under relevant provisions of IPC, POCSO Act and Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, and against the victim's mother for abetment (as she concealed the criminal acts of the priest). Findings Victim's age Firstly, the Court determined the age of the victim in terms of Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. As per this provision, for determining the standard of proof, the first preference is given to the date of birth certificate issued from the school or the matriculation or equivalent certificate from the Examination Board, and in the absence of these documents, the extract of the birth certificate issued by the local authority is to be relied on to prove the age of the victim, and so on. In this case, the prosecution had produced an extract of the school Admission Register. On perusing the same, the Court said, "prosecution evidence shows that the victim had just crossed 12 years on the date of the first incident alleged, and as such, the victim was a 'child' as defined under the PoCSO Act." Commission of Offence After going through the material placed on record, such as medical reports and witness statements, the Court was convinced that "cogent evidence" exist to hold that the priest committed penetrative sexual assault on the victim. It noted that the evidence of PW1 (victim) regarding the acts of the accused (priest) is corroborated by her previous statements to the doctor, her relatives and before the police, in her FIS, as provided under section 157 of the Indian Evidence Act. This provision stipulates that in order to corroborate the testimony of a witness, any former statement made by such witness relating to the same fact at or about the time when the fact took place or before any authority legally competent to investigate the fact, may be proved. Victim not a tutored witness The accused (priest) had alleged that the victim's aunt had enmity towards him and thus has had tutored the victim. He further alleged that the other relative had nothing to do with his family and her involvement in the matter was bereft of any reasonableness. The Court however rejected this contention with the following observation: "Her (victim's) demeanor was noted during her examination. She was totally broken and...

'Crime Pierces The Soul Of The Society': Kerala Court Sentences Temple Priest To Life Imprisonment For Rape Of 13Yr Old Stepdaughter

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags