The Chhattisgarh High Court has firmly dismissed a criminal appeal filed by a man convicted of raping his minor niece. The court upheld the 25-year rigorous imprisonment sentence, strongly stating that refusing to rely on a sexual assault survivor's testimony just because it lacks corroboration adds insult to injury.
Court Rejects Appeal, Upholds Conviction
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal delivered this significant judgment. They found no merit in the appeal challenging the February 4, 2025 verdict from the POCSO court in Korba. The appellant was convicted under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.
Survivor Testimony Holds Great Weight
The bench made a powerful observation about the importance of survivor testimony in sexual offence cases. They noted that in India's traditional social setting, a girl or woman often hesitates to report such incidents due to fear of social ostracization. This reluctance provides an inbuilt assurance that allegations are genuine rather than fabricated.
The evidence of a sex offence survivor deserves great weight, even without corroboration, the court emphasized. They clarified that a rape survivor is not an accomplice but a victim who has endured trauma. The judges underlined that insisting on corroboration as a rule is neither required by law nor desirable.
Case Background and Evidence
The prosecution case dates back to January 2022. The minor victim informed her mother over phone that her elder paternal uncle had sexually assaulted her at their Korba residence. An FIR was lodged the very next day.
Medical examination revealed fresh external and internal genital injuries consistent with recent sexual assault. Forensic reports further confirmed the crime. The defense tried to claim false implication due to an alleged family dispute. They argued the survivor's statement was influenced by her mother and questioned the determination of her age.
The High Court rejected all these contentions. Documentary evidence conclusively established the survivor was 13 years old at the time of the offence.
Legal Precedents Cited
The bench referred to several Supreme Court judgments to support their decision. They cited cases including Rameshwar v. State of Rajasthan, Ranjit Hazarika v. State of Assam, and Rai Sandeep @ Deenu v. State of NCT of Delhi. These rulings reaffirm that corroboration is not essential for conviction in rape cases.
The court stressed that if the survivor's testimony appears natural, remains consistent, and withstands cross-examination, it can alone form the basis for conviction. They also mentioned recent Supreme Court rulings highlighting the need for strict application of the POCSO Act.
Final Decision and Sentencing
After thoroughly examining the survivor's testimony, medical evidence, forensic reports, and overall circumstances, the High Court concluded the prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. They found no illegality or perversity in the trial court's findings.
The bench dismissed the criminal appeal and directed the appellant to continue serving his sentence. The original judgment from February 4, 2025 by the Additional Sessions Judge, FTSC (POCSO), Korba convicted the appellant under Section 6 of the POCSO Act. It sentenced him to 25 years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs 2,000, plus an additional six months rigorous imprisonment in default of payment.
The Chhattisgarh High Court's decision sends a clear message about the judicial approach to sexual offences against children. It reinforces that survivor testimony carries substantial weight in our legal system, especially in cases involving minors under the POCSO Act.
