Kolkata: Age is no factor to disbelieve a sex-abuse victim's testimony, the Calcutta High Court said on Thursday, adding that it can only be done if the medical opinion completely contradicts it as "patently absurd". The HC also said the lack of injuries on a minor rape victim's body does not automatically prove she wasn't raped but can also indicate she was too physically weak to resist her attacker.
The HC was hearing a case of rape of a 10-year-old girl in Bankura district. The incident took place on Nov 26, 2014, when the victim was dragged to a nearby forest and raped by the accused. The victim informed her mother, and a complaint was lodged with cops.
Senior advocate Ranjan Roy, appearing for the accused, contended that the evidence of the minor was unreliable as, during cross-examination, she stated that she deposed on the instruction of public prosecutors and had not stated facts before the magistrate. "The victim is an unreliable and tutored witness," Roy had said.
But the division bench of Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Gaurang Kanth said, "Evidence of a minor victim of sexual offence must be appreciated with due care and sensitivity. One ought not lose sight of the tender age and the trauma suffered by a 10-year-old girl who was raped. Taking into consideration the trauma suffered by a minor victim in sexual offences, law provides for her special protection and support."
Going by sections 36 and 37 of the Pocso Act, the court noted that the child, resting confidence on her parents and the public prosecutor, deposed in court "the most horrible incident of her life". "Her tender age and vulnerability are further exposed by the fact that she was unable to read the statement recorded by the magistrate and incorrectly stated that she had not narrated such facts before the magistrate," the division bench held.
The defence case stated that the doctor's opinion said "probability of injury on labia majora". The HC said, "Absence of injury on labia majora may be due to inability of the minor to resist the sexual act. Absence of injury per se does not rule out rape."
The accused, amongst various charges, was awarded a maximum sentence of life imprisonment for the offence punishable under section 4 of the PocsoAct. Considering that he did not have any criminal antecedent and that he was in his 20s, and there is a high possibility of reformation, the bench modified the sentence imposed upon him to 10 years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs 30,000 for the offence punishable under section 4 of the Pocso Act.
Kolkata: Age is no factor to disbelieve a sex-abuse victim's testimony, the Calcutta High Court said on Thursday, adding that it can only be done if the medical opinion completely contradicts it as "patently absurd". The HC also said the lack of injuries on a minor rape victim's body does not automatically prove she wasn't raped but can also indicate she was too physically weak to resist her attacker.
The HC was hearing a case of rape of a 10-year-old girl in Bankura district. The incident took place on Nov 26, 2014, when the victim was dragged to a nearby forest and raped by the accused. The victim informed her mother, and a complaint was lodged with cops.
Senior advocate Ranjan Roy, appearing for the accused, contended that the evidence of the minor was unreliable as, during cross-examination, she stated that she deposed on the instruction of public prosecutors and had not stated facts before the magistrate. "The victim is an unreliable and tutored witness," Roy had said.
But the division bench of Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Gaurang Kanth said, "Evidence of a minor victim of sexual offence must be appreciated with due care and sensitivity. One ought not lose sight of the tender age and the trauma suffered by a 10-year-old girl who was raped. Taking into consideration the trauma suffered by a minor victim in sexual offences, law provides for her special protection and support."
Going by sections 36 and 37 of the Pocso Act, the court noted that the child, resting confidence on her parents and the public prosecutor, deposed in court "the most horrible incident of her life". "Her tender age and vulnerability are further exposed by the fact that she was unable to read the statement recorded by the magistrate and incorrectly stated that she had not narrated such facts before the magistrate," the division bench held.
The defence case stated that the doctor's opinion said "probability of injury on labia majora". The HC said, "Absence of injury on labia majora may be due to inability of the minor to resist the sexual act. Absence of injury per se does not rule out rape."
The accused, amongst various charges, was awarded a maximum sentence of life imprisonment for the offence punishable under section 4 of the PocsoAct. Considering that he did not have any criminal antecedent and that he was in his 20s, and there is a high possibility of reformation, the bench modified the sentence imposed upon him to 10 years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs 30,000 for the offence punishable under section 4 of the Pocso Act.