Punjab and Haryana High Court Reiterated

The Punjab and Haryana High Court upheld the conviction in the rape case of a 6-year-old victim, stating that “the accused cannot be given the benefit of doubt even if there is no injury on the body of the prosecutor”.

Justice Anupinder Singh Grewal And Justice Kirti Singh “Violent crimes against women must be met with severe punitive measures. Courts must heed society’s urgent call for justice, especially in cases involving the heinous crime of rape against innocent and defenseless young girls. Such behavior of convicts is incurable.” “It must be approached with tolerance, especially given the increasing number of crimes committed against children and the unimaginable trauma that the victim will endure for the rest of his life.”

The court also added that the indelible traces left by such a horrific event cannot be easily erased from the mind of a young child and his trauma cannot be alleviated by ordinary means. Sexual violence is not only a degrading and inhumane act, but also an illegal attack on a woman’s right to privacy and bodily sanctity.

Speaking on behalf of the bench, Justice Kirti Singh said the impact of these crimes required the harshest response of the judicial system to protect the most vulnerable members of society.

The court was hearing an appeal filed by two convicts under Sections 376 (2) (g) who were sentenced to life imprisonment for sexually assaulting a minor girl in 2009.

Examining the allegations, the Court found that the prosecution’s claim was supported by the testimony of the victim’s grandmother, who was an eyewitness, and the prosecutor’s statement.

“The statements of the prosecutor and other material witnesses were found credible. Although the prosecutor was a six-year-old child at the time of the incident, he showed sufficient maturity during the examination to explain the act committed against him. The court noted that he was accused/plaintiffs.”

The court panel said that she clearly stated that both defendants sexually assaulted her.

Regarding the arguments advanced by the appellants’ counsel regarding inconsistencies in the evidence of some witnesses, the bench said that it has been held in numerous decisions of the Supreme Court that minor inconsistencies in the evidence will not weaken the prosecution’s case. .

The court also rejected the claim that there were no visible signs of injury on the victim’s body.

“The contention of the learned counsel for the appellants that there was no visible injury on the person of the prosecutor is devoid of merit. This contention is contradicted by the evidence of PW3 Dr. Narender Kaur, who conducted forensic examination on the victim. The court submitted that fresh injuries were found on the private parts of the prosecutor.” he stated.

He added that these findings showed that sexual intercourse had occurred, thus refuting the appellants’ claim and providing significant support to the prosecution’s case. Consequently, the contention that the absence of injury weakens the claims against the appellants is not supported by the medical evidence on record.

Reliance was placed on Krishan Vs. State of Haryana (2014 (13) SCC 574) states that in every case of rape, it is not necessary to have injuries on the victim’s body to prove the allegation.

In view of the above, the objections are dismissed.

Title: XXXXX – State of Haryana (CRA-D-280-DB-2011 (O&M)

Quote: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 321