The High Court of Delhi recently refused to set aside the conviction and sentence awarded to a man for raping a 5 year old girl, rejecting his contention that he was falsely implicated by the parents of the minor girl to settle scores with him
“It is pertinent to note that it has come in the evidence that appellant was residing in the house of prosecutrix and was having cordial relations with the family of prosecutrix and the above-said evidence remains unchallenged and so, in the instant case, no prudent person can conclude that appellant has been falsely implicated because he objected to children of prosecutrix’s mother defecating in front of house or because of quarrel on this count. Neither parent would stake the honour of their minor daughter and the family, to level such a serious accusation of rape against appellant, to settle the scores on account of such a trivial quarrel, particularly when the relations were cordial,” Justice Sunil Gaur observed.
The Court further observed that non-joining of public witnesses in a case like the one at hand is “immaterial” because the veracity of version put forth by prosecutrix has to be objectively considered.
Thereafter, holding that the deposition of the prosecutrix in the instant case was trustworthy, the Court dismissed the Appeal, and observed, “There is no material infirmity in the prosecution case, to justify granting of benefit of doubt to appellant. In view of foregoing narration, I find no substance in this appeal and as such, it is dismissed. The concerned Jail Superintendent to apprise appellant about fate of his appeal.”