SC surprised the High Court’s decision
The Supreme Court in the judgment on March 18 surprised that the High Court rejected a well -conscious decision of the trial court in the order of just 6 pages and Aadhaar said that the victim did not make any statement during the cross -examination and she was silent and crying. The High Court had canceled the accused’s sentence, saying that the victim did not make any statement during her testimony and hence the accused should be given the benefit of doubt in the absence of direct evidence.
Supreme Court overturns HC’s decision
The decision of the Rajasthan High Court was challenged by the state government in the Supreme Court. The bench of Supreme Court Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sanjay Karol overturned the High Court verdict and said that only the victim’s silence could not weaken the prosecution case, especially when other evidence, such as medical and circumstantial evidence, pointing to the accused. When asked about the incident, the trial court registered that the victim kept quiet and only shed tears. This testimony cannot be drawn to no direct conclusion about the crime. But in our view, it cannot be used in favor of the accused. These tears should be evaluated in their correct context. This silence is a child’s silence, which cannot be considered as the silence of an adult woman.
‘The victim could not testify due to the trauma of the incident’
The Supreme Court said that the victim’s testimony is usually a significant evidence in rape cases, but this does not mean that if the victim does not give a statement, the prosecution will be weakened. Especially when other concrete evidence is present. The court admitted that the victim was a child and could not testify due to trauma at the time of the incident. The court made it clear that a child’s testimony should be carefully investigated, but if it is found reliable, it can alone become the basis of conviction. Referring to the Maharashtra government vs Bhanu case, the victim was ‘deaf and mentally handicapped’ and unable to testify. Nevertheless, the court convicted the accused based on other evidence.
The incident took place in 1986, and the appeal in the High Court was filed in 1987, but the decision on it came in 2013. Accepting the appeal of the Rajasthan government, the Supreme Court restored the 7 -year sentence of the accused and said that it is very sad that this minor girl and her family had to go through the pain and waiting of this horrific incident for almost four decades.
