The Orissa High Court has delivered a significant judgment upholding a man's conviction in a rape case, firmly stating that no one possesses any licence to violate a woman's body. This ruling reinforces the principle that every woman is entitled to privacy and the right to live with dignity, irrespective of her character or background.
Court Dismisses Convict's Plea
Justice R K Pattanaik dismissed the revision plea filed by the rape convict, who had challenged his conviction under Section 376 (rape) of the Indian Penal Code. The court affirmed the findings of both the trial court and the appellate court, ensuring that justice was served in this long-standing case.
Rejection of Defence Based on Survivor's Character
The defence had argued that the survivor was 'accustomed to sexual intercourse' and 'a girl of easy virtue'. However, the Orissa High Court rejected this line of argument, emphasizing that such claims hold no merit in undermining the credibility of the survivor's testimony.
The court observed, "The law is well settled that even in the case of an unchaste woman, who alleges sexual mischief, her evidence is not to be thrown away." This statement draws from the Supreme Court's decision in State of Maharashtra and another v. Madhukar Narayan Mardikar, which highlights that a woman of any character is entitled to privacy, and no one can invade it.
Background of the Case
The prosecution alleged that in June 1999, the victim, who was aged about 16 to 17 years at the time, was allegedly raped by the accused while she was collecting mushrooms in a nearby jungle. The accused was armed with a knife, making it impossible for her to physically resist.
Following the incident, an FIR was registered, and a case under Section 376 of the IPC was initiated. The Assistant Sessions Judge, Bhanjanagar, convicted the accused of rape and sentenced him to seven years of imprisonment. This conviction was later upheld by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhanjanagar.
Key Findings of the Court
The Orissa High Court made several critical observations in its judgment:
- Absence of Struggle: The defence claimed that the absence of struggle during the act made the survivor's evidence untrustworthy. The court countered this by noting that given the survivor's age and the convict's armed threat, physical opposition was not feasible.
- Inconsistencies in Evidence: The court clarified that inconsistencies only matter if they go to the root of the case. Here, the surrounding circumstances and evidence strongly supported the prosecution's case.
- Defence's Failure to Prove Character Allegations: The defence attempted to portray the survivor as being of 'easy virtue', but failed to produce any evidence to substantiate this claim. The court rightly rejected this plea, stating that no such evidence was adduced.
Importance of Witness Testimony
The defence also argued that the parents of the victim were interested witnesses, and their testimony should not be accepted without independent corroboration. However, the court held that being interested witnesses does not automatically discredit their evidence. Their support for the prosecution case is natural and does not imply falsehood.
The court emphasized, "None can have any license to violate a woman's body even of easy virtue as she is entitled to her privacy and right to live with dignity." This statement underscores the judiciary's commitment to protecting women's rights and ensuring that character assassination does not derail justice.
Broader Implications
This judgment sets a crucial precedent in Indian legal jurisprudence, particularly in cases involving sexual violence. It sends a clear message that attempts to undermine survivors based on their character will not be tolerated. The court's reliance on established legal principles and Supreme Court rulings reinforces the robustness of the judicial process in safeguarding women's dignity.
The Orissa High Court's decision is a reminder that the law stands firmly with survivors, prioritizing their right to justice over baseless defences. It highlights the need for continued vigilance and legal reforms to protect women from such violations and ensure that perpetrators are held accountable.
