Supreme Court Restores Conviction in 40-Year-Old Sexual Assault Case

The State of Rajasthan preferred an appeal against the judgment of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench, which had acquitted the respondent-accused, Chatra, thereby setting aside the conviction recorded by the learned Sessions Judge, Tonk in 1987. The Trial Court had found Chatra guilty of the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and sentenced him to 7 years rigorous imprisonment.

Background:
A distressing incident that occurred nearly four decades ago that is on March 3, 1986, involving the alleged sexual assault of a minor girl, who was discovered in unconscious and bleeding state. One Gulab Chand (PW-2) filed a report with the police.

The Supreme Court, expressing surprise at the manner in which the High Court dealt with the matter as a First Appellate Court, allowed the appeal filed by the State. The Apex Court set aside the High Court's judgment of acquittal and restored the Trial Court's judgment of conviction against the respondent-accused.

The Apex Court independently examined the evidence, noting that the victim (PW-1), and the victim, being a child at the time of examination, did not say a word when questioned on the incident but only cried, held the view that such silence based on trauma could not be turned against the prosecution. The evidence of the complainant, Gulab Chand (PW-2), although with some inconsistency between the FIR and his court deposition, was considered reliable, particularly in view of the supporting medical evidence by PW-14, Dr. Vasudev, who deposed regarding the injuries on the private parts of the victim being consistent with rape. The Court discovered no substance in the defence's submissions about motive or other explanations of the victim's injuries. As such, the respondent-accused was ordered to report to serve the sentence handed down by the Trial Court.

The High Court's inability to independently and properly evaluate the evidence as the First Appellate Court was a major area of concern to the Supreme Court.

The Court ruled that the failure of a traumatized child victim to speak in court should not automatically serve to acquit the accused.

Although noting inconsistencies in the statements of the complainant, the Court considered them not substantial enough to reject his entire testimony, particularly given the corroboration by other evidence.

The ruling again stated that corroboration of the testimony of a child witness is an exercise of caution and prudence, but not an absolute requirement.

The Court placed stress on the fact that medical evidence was an important element to confirm the reality of sexual assault and the characteristics of the injuries.

The Apex Court pondered over the canons guiding the examination of circumstantial evidence, as well as evidence of child witnesses, stressing that while circumspection must be exercised, their statements cannot be disregarded based solely on the aspect of tender age, and corroboration is an aspect of caution. Invoking principles of circumstantial evidence, the Supreme Court concluded that the link of circumstances such as the version of the witness and medical examinations indicated towards the guilt of the accused.

Coram: Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sanjay Karol
Between: STATE OF RAJASTHAN VS CHATRA 2025 INSC 360
Date of Judgment: 18-03-2025