Kerala High Court Rejects Delay in FIR as Ground for Acquittal, Upholds Conviction and Modifies Sentence in Case of Sexual Assault
In a landmark ruling, the Kerala High Court dismissed the delay in filing the First Information Report (FIR) as a valid ground for acquittal and upheld the conviction of the accused while modifying the sentence in a case of sexual assault. The court’s decision, delivered on June 12, 2023, reinforces the significance of timely reporting of such heinous crimes. The headline highlights the court’s rejection of the delay in FIR argument, underscoring the importance of taking prompt action in cases of sexual assault.
The division bench consisting of The Honourable Mr. Justice P.B. Suresh Kumar and The Honourable Mrs. Justice C.S. Sudha, pronounced their judgment on the appeal challenging the conviction and sentence of the accused, Raju. He stood charged with offenses punishable under Sections 376(2)(f) and 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 23 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000.
Addressing the defense’s contention regarding the delay in filing the FIR, the court firmly stated, “A child who was subjected to sexual assault by her father, not disclosing the same to anyone during her childhood, is no reason to think that what is spoken to by her at a matured age is false.” The court further emphasized that the delay in lodging the FIR had been satisfactorily explained by the prosecution. This quote from the judgment emphasizes the court’s stance on the significance of the victim’s testimony and the need to consider the circumstances surrounding delayed reporting.
In addition to the delay argument, the defense raised other objections related to witness examination and corroborative evidence. However, the court found the victim’s testimony to be credible, consistent, and supported by medical examination and expert opinions. The evidence presented by the victim was deemed genuine and devoid of doubt.
The judgment also addressed the modification of the sentence imposed on the accused. Considering various factors, including the social background of the parties involved, the court modified the sentence for the offense under Section 376(2)(f) of the IPC. The revised sentence imposed rigorous imprisonment for a period of 20 years, as opposed to imprisonment for the remainder of the accused’s natural life.
The ruling sets a significant precedent, highlighting the court’s stance on the importance of timely reporting in cases of sexual assault. It underscores the need to focus on the credibility of the victim’s testimony while considering the specific circumstances of each case. The judgment serves as a reminder of the court’s commitment to delivering justice and protecting the rights of survivors of sexual assault.
D.D-12 .JUNE. 2023
RAJU VS STATE OF KERALA
