Child’s teary silence can’t aid rapist’s defence: Supreme Court | India News

NEW DELHI: Reversing the acquittal of an individual in a 40-year-old rape case, Supreme Court mentioned the silence of a bit of lady with tears rolling down her cheeks when requested concerning the incident within the trial court docket throughout cross-examination can’t be an indicator of innocence of the accused.
Slamming the insensitivity of the Rajasthan HC decide for acquitting the accused, who was 21 when convicted and sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment by the trial court docket in 1987 for raping the minor, SC additionally criticised HC for naming the rape survivor.
Can’t equate lady’s silence to that of grownup prosecutrix: SC
HC took 26 years to resolve the attraction of the convict and acquitted him via a six-page judgment. The Rajasthan govt’s attraction, filed in 2013, was lastly determined by an SC bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sanjay Karol after 12 years, indicative of the pattern that whereas trial courts resolve circumstances expeditiously, it’s the constitutional courts the place appeals linger for many years.
The trial decide had recorded the kid rape survivor had not deposed something concerning the fee of the offence throughout cross-examination and when repeatedly requested, “she shed tears in silence”.
HC had taken this as one of many grounds to acquit the convict.
Writing the judgment, Justice Karol mentioned, “This, in our view, cannot be used as a factor in favour of the accused. The tears of ‘V’ (minor girl) have to be understood for what they are worth. This silence cannot accrue to the benefit of the accused. The silence here is that of a child. It cannot be equated with the silence of a fully realised adult prosecutrix…”
“V has not turned hostile. Trauma has engulfed her in silence. It would be unfair to burden her young shoulders with the weight of the entire prosecution. A child traumatised at a tender age by this ghastly imposition upon her must be relieved of being the basis on which her offender can be put behind bars,” Justice Karol mentioned and proceeded to cull out different related proof, medical and circumstantial, which unequivocally pointed to the guilt of the accused, Chhatra.
The medical proof pointed to the ghastly manner Chhatra sexually assaulted the lady. After analyzing different proof on the case data, Justices Nath and Karol allowed the attraction, put aside the HC judgment and upheld the conviction and sentence awarded to Chatra by trial court docket.
Chhatra, who was 22 years of age when he was convicted by the trial court docket in 1987, would now be over 60 years and SC directed him to give up earlier than the authorities involved inside 4 weeks to serve the sentence.