Special Appeal Maintainable If Single Judge's Order Relates To Authority Acting Without Statutory Appellate Jurisdiction: Allahabad High Court Recall Of Witness For Cross-Examination Permissible On Newly Framed Issue Post-Remand Even If Disposal Timeline Is Fixed: Karnataka High Court Litigant Cannot Overcome Law Of Limitation By Shifting Blame On Counsel Through Inconsistent Stands: Madras High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Preventive Detention Not Warranted If Person Can Be Dealt With Under Ordinary Laws; No Effort To Arrest In Pending Cases: Supreme Court Accused Languishing In Jail For 9 Years Deserves Bail; Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 Violated: Supreme Court Election Disputes Must Be Resolved Expeditiously; Long Stays Render Adjudication A Mockery Of Justice: Madras High Court Delhi High Court Suspends LOC, Permits Businessman To Travel Abroad For Healthcare Conferences; Cites Roots In Society & Past Compliance Section 138 NI Act Complaint Not Maintainable By Third Party Who Is Neither Payee Nor Holder In Due Course: Allahabad High Court Writ Petition Cannot Be Dismissed On ‘Forum Non Conveniens’ If Respondent's Office Is Within Court's Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Supreme Court Doubts 'Sajjan Singh' Ruling; Refers To Larger Bench Whether Third Judge Can Re-examine Unanimous Findings Under Section 392 CrPC SARFAESI Sale Vitiated If Balance 75% Bid Amount Is Paid Beyond 15 Days Without Written Extension Agreement: Supreme Court Delhi High Court Can't Refuse Writ Petition Against BSF Dismissal Merely Because Cause Of Action Arose Outside Delhi: Supreme Court Private Rights Must Yield To Public Interest: Andhra Pradesh High Court Directs Removal Of Encroachments On Public Road Review Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Re-Agitate Factual Disputes Or Seek Re-Hearing On Merits: Allahabad High Court Recovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act Vitiated If Police Already Present At Spot Before Arrival Of Panch Witnesses: Bombay High Court Mere Non-Compliance Or Delay In Procedure Under Section 52A NDPS Act Is An Irregularity, Not An Illegality Entitling Accused To Bail: Calcutta High Court Recovery Of Weapon Used In Commission Of Offence Not A Sine Qua Non For Conviction If Ocular Evidence Is Corroborated: Allahabad High Court Seized Vehicles Shouldn't Be Kept Idle To Rot In Police Stations, Utility Vanishes Due To Stagnation: Karnataka High Court Or 39 CPC | Trial Court Erred In Dismissing Injunction Application Despite Respondent's 'No Objection' To Restraining Share Transfer: Gauhati High Court Issuing NBW Merely For Absence Of Accused Already On Bail Is Improper; Liberty Cannot Be Dealt With Lightly: Orissa High Court 138 NI | Expert Examination Of Disputed Documents Essential For Just Adjudication If Complainant Denies Handwriting & Signatures: Rajasthan High Court Order 41 Rule 27 CPC Cannot Be Invoked To Fill Lacunae In Evidence If Party Voluntarily Closed Evidence In Trial Court: Delhi High Court

 Kerala High Court Rejects Delay in FIR as Ground for Acquittal, Upholds Conviction and Modifies Sentence in Case of Sexual Assault

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


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

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Raju_Vs_State_12_June_23_Kerla_HC1.pdf"]

Latest Legal News