Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“The accused in this case was a doctor to whom the child was sent for medicine. The accused was in a position of authority and trust, and it was such a position that had been misused by him… In such circumstances, no leniency is called for.”
Minor inconsistencies arising from age, vocabulary or manner of narration do not erode the credibility of the prosecution, particularly where the allegation relates to commission of sexual assault with sexual intent.
The Supreme Court had taken suo motu cognizance of the matter after an NGO ‘We the Women of India’ approached the Court against the impugned decision.
Allahabad High Court concluded that the findings of the court below regarding the offence of attempt to rape in relation to accused persons are not sustainable. Instead, they should be summoned for offence under Section 354(b) of the IPC, read with Section 9 read with Section 10 of the POCSO Act.
The victim’s testimony in sexual assault cases is vital and unless there are compelling reasons which necessitates looking for corroboration of her statement, the courts shall find no difficulty to act on the testimony of a victim of sexual assault alone to convict an accused where her testimony inspires confidence and is found to be reliable.
“Conviction can be made only on the basis of the testimony of the prosecutrix without any independent corroboration. However, in such case, the testimony of the prosecutrix has to be of a sterling quality.”
The Court found that none of the acts of the convict would come within the definition of ‘rape’ under Section 375 of the IPC or ‘penetrative sexual assault’ under Section 3 of the POCSO Act.