[ad_1]
Reported By: Salil Tiwari
Last Updated: December 05, 2023, 17:54 IST
The HC noted that the man was known to the survivor, who had clearly implicated him in her statements before the Magistrate as well as before the trial court. (Shutterstock)
The Allahabad High Court (HC) referred to the judgment of the top court (Tamil Nadu vs Ravi alias Nehru, 2006) where it was held that even a slight penetration of penis into vagina without rupturing hymen would constitute rape
The Allahabad High Court (HC) recently upheld the conviction of a man for raping a minor, referring to the judgment of the top court (Tamil Nadu vs Ravi alias Nehru, 2006) where it was held that even a slight penetration of penis into vagina without rupturing hymen would constitute rape.
The special POCSO court had sentenced the man to life imprisonment in 2022 for the rape of the eight-year-old girl.
The HC noted that the man was known to the survivor, who had clearly implicated him in her statements before the Magistrate as well as before the trial court. “The medical evidence also corroborates the testimony of the victim. The doctor has opined that redness and partially torn hymen were due to penetration of some hard and blunt object, but the penetration was incomplete, hence hymen was partially torn,” the court highlighted.
SENTENCE MODIFIED
The court held the man guilty of the offences under Sections 376 of IPC and 5/6 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act), however, it modified the sentence. The special court had sentenced the man to undergo life imprisonment along with a fine of Rs 50,000. However, the high court bench of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi modified it to rigorous imprisonment for 10 years with a fine of Rs 50,000.
While reducing the sentence, the bench took into consideration the submission of the convict’s counsel that the incident was of the year 2016 and he was languishing in jail for the past seven years. The counsel had urged the bench to adopt a lenient view stating that the convict was a married person and due to his incarceration, his family was suffering as he was the only breadwinner.
THE CASE
The First Information Report (FIR) in the case was registered by the brother of the girl in 2016, four days after the incident. He alleged that his eight-year-old sister was sexually assaulted by Suresh.
As per the FIR, the girl used to live with her brother at his place, but had moved to her father’s house a few days prior to the incident.
In the appeal against conviction, the counsel contended that the girl was the only witness on whom the prosecution case was based and the medical evidence did not corroborate her oral testimony.
He referred to the pathology report of vaginal smear and cervical smear of the girl, which was negative and no spermatozoa had been found. He also submitted that in medical reports, her hymen was found intact. So, he contended that it indicated that actually no sexual assault was committed.
