News Updates

SC Affirms Conviction In Rape Case Rejecting Prosecuterix's Affidavit That Her Complaint Against Accused Was Under Pressure [Read Order]

23 Feb 2020 10:54 AM GMT
SC Affirms Conviction In Rape Case Rejecting Prosecuterix
Your free access to Live Law has expired
To read the article, get a premium account.
    Your Subscription Supports Independent Journalism
Subscription starts from
(For 6 Months)
Premium account gives you:
  • Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.
  • Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.
Already a subscriber?

While affirming conviction of the accused in a rape case, the Supreme Court refused to accept affidavit filed by the prosecuterix that she had lodged the case against the accused under pressure.

Rakesh Kumar Yadav had filed an appeal before the Apex Court challenging his concurrent conviction in a rape case. The Chhattisgarh High Court had affirmed the conviction and sentence imposed on the accused.

During the pendency of this appeal before the Apex Court, the prosecutrix filed an affidavit stating that it was under pressure that she had lodged a case against the accused.

In view of the statements of the prosecutrix, her husband and the daughter of the victim, the affidavit filed by the prosecutrix in this Court stating that she had lodged the case against the appellant under pressure, cannot be relied upon, the bench comprising of Justices Arun Mishra and Indira Banerjee said while affirming the conviction and sentence imposed on the accused.

In December 2019, the Apex Court had reiterated that compromise between rape accused and victim is of no relevance in deciding criminal cases.

HC Judgment

The High Court had found that the statement of the prosecutrix is quite natural, inspires confidence and merits acceptance. In this regard, the High Court had made following observation: In the traditional non-permissive bounds of society of India, no girl or woman of self respect and dignity would depose falsely implicating somebody of ravishing her chastity by sacrificing and jeopardizing her future prospect. Evidence of the prosecutrix to be followed at par with an injured witness and when her evidence is inspiring confidence, no corroboration is necessary, but in the present case, there is ample corroborative piece of evidence that daughter of the prosecutrix reached to the spot while process was going on and again husband of the prosecutrix also reached to the spot and found the appellant in the company of the prosecutrix.

Rejecting the defence based on delay of lodging FIR, the High Court had observed that, in a tradition bound society prevalent in India, more particularly, rural areas, it would be quite unsafe to throw out the prosecution case merely on the ground that there is some delay in lodging the FIR.

Click here to Read/Download Order

Read Order

Next Story