Mentally Ill Woman’s Testimony Valid: Supreme Court To Rape Convict

New Delhi:

The testimony of a mentally sick lady, who had narrated the incident of rape dedicated upon her in query reply type earlier than the trial courtroom, has nailed the offender because the Supreme Courtroom Thursday upheld his conviction whereas terming her assertion as “credible”.

The 36-year-old lady, who’s affected by 70 per cent incapacity and was raped in Uttarakhand in September 2015, had testified earlier than the trial courtroom in query reply type as oath couldn’t be administered to her since she was unable to grasp its which means.

The trial courtroom, which had convicted and sentenced the person to 10-years in jail in October 2016, had famous in its verdict that in her cross-examination the lady had rightly recognized the photograph frames of father of the nation Mahatma Gandhi and former prime minister Lal Bahadur Shastri.

A plea filed by the convict difficult the March 2019 verdict of the excessive courtroom, which had dismissed his enchantment and affirmed the trial courtroom’s judgement, got here up for listening to earlier than a bench of justices L Nageswara Rao and Aniruddha Bose.

“There are particular contradictions within the proof. Nevertheless, we’re of the thought of view that the testimony of the prosecutrix (lady) which is credible might be the only foundation for the conviction of the appellant beneath part 376 (2)(l) of the IPC,” the bench mentioned.

Part 376 (2)(l) of the Indian Penal Code offers with offence of rape dedicated on any individual affected by psychological or bodily sickness.

An advocate, who was aiding the highest courtroom as an amicus curiae and representing the convict, instructed the bench that there was no medical proof to help the allegations because of the delay in lodging of FIR and medical examination of the lady.

He additionally argued that there have been primary contradictions within the statements of prosecution witnesses.

The counsel showing for the state referred to the assertion of the lady and mentioned it was clear that it was a case of rape.

“We’ve got rigorously scrutinised the complete materials on document, together with the proof that’s filed by the prosecution. After contemplating the submission of the counsel for the appellant, we aren’t in settlement that an error has been dedicated by the courtroom under in convicting the appellant beneath part 376 (2)(l),” the bench mentioned, whereas dismissing the plea.

The bench mentioned there was delay in registration of FIR within the case and medical examination of the sufferer, nearly 20 days after the incident, couldn’t have disclosed accidents or proof of rape.