Married Daughter Cannot Be Excluded From Compassionate Appointment Solely On The Ground Of Marriage: Chhattisgarh High Court Allahabad HC Condemns Lawyers Seeking Adjournments To Attend District Courts Inherent Powers Under Section 151 CPC Cannot Be Invoked For Restoration Of Possession When Statutory Remedy Of Restitution Exists: Calcutta High Court Invoke Preventive Detention Laws Against Sand Mining Kingpins: Supreme Court Directs ED Probe To Protect Chambal Sanctuary Res Judicata Bars Pendente Lite Purchaser From Re-Agitating Impleadment Under Order XXII Rule 10 CPC If Rejected Under Order I Rule 10: Supreme Court Consumer Complaints Can Continue Against Promoters & Co-Developers Even If Corporate Debtor Is Under IBC Moratorium: Supreme Court IBC Moratorium Protects Only Corporate Debtor, Does Not Bar Consumer Complaints Against Promoters & Directors: Supreme Court Vehicle Registration Certificate Relevant But Not Conclusive For Deciding Interim Custody Under Section 451 CrPC: Supreme Court Lawyer Has No Unqualified Right To Continuous Presence During Entire Interrogation Under Section 38 BNSS: Supreme Court Mandating Continuous Videography Of Accused During Transit Is Unworkable, May Lead To Unfounded Allegations: Supreme Court Centre Introduces FCRA Amendment Bill 2026: Proposes Vesting Of Defunct NGO Assets In 'Designated Authority', Mandates Prior Nod For Probe Written Communication Of Grounds Of Arrest Not Mandatory For Arrests Prior To SC's 'Mihir Rajesh Shah' Judgment: Orissa High Court Passing Ex-Parte Maintenance Order Without Verifying Status Of WhatsApp Or Email Notice Violates Natural Justice: Madhya Pradesh High Court Training ChatGPT On Copyrighted News Is 'Fair Dealing', Does Not Amount To Infringement: Delhi High Court Refuses To Enjoin OpenAI Mere Reproduction Of Evidence Can Never Be Equated With Appreciation: Karnataka High Court Quashes Penalty Against Govt Employee Accused Cannot Repeatedly Send Cheque To FSL Till Favourable Report Is Obtained: Kerala High Court In NI Act Case Succession Certificate Cannot Be Issued For Gold Jewels Pledged With Bank, Applies Only To Debts And Securities: Madras High Court Order 11 Rule 14 CPC | Court Cannot Direct Production Of Documents Without Ascertaining They Are In Party's Possession: Calcutta High Court Undertrial Prisoners Don't Suffer 'Civil Death', Retain Fundamental Right To Alienate Property From Jail: Rajasthan High Court Direction For Reasonable Annual Enhancement Of Maintenance Under Section 125 CrPC Merely Preserves Its Real Value Against Inflation: Delhi High Court Testimony Of Sole Interested Witness Must Be Of 'Sterling Quality' To Base Conviction: Patna High Court Acquits Murder Convict Failure To Communicate Written Grounds Of Arrest Renders Arrest Constitutionally Infirm, Accused Entitled To Bail: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 482 CrPC Petition Not Maintainable Against Order Framing Charge Under SC/ST Act, Appeal Lies Under Section 14A: Tripura High Court Disputed Questions Of Fact Regarding Title And Forged Documents Cannot Be Decided Under Article 226: Telangana High Court Matter To Be Enquired By Bar Council: Madhya Pradesh High Court Dismisses Lawyer's PILs With Costs For Suppressing Attorney-Client Relationship BDA Cannot Arbitrarily Reverse Resolutions Passed To Comply With Judicial Directives: Karnataka High Court Section 52A NDPS Act: Mere Non-Compliance Does Not Automatically Vitiate Trial Unless Evidence Is Doubtful: Punjab & Haryana High Court Rethinking Access to Justice: Proposing a Client-Choice Bar-Integrated Model as a Viable Alternative to the LADC System Delhi Police Grants Permission To Advocates To Protest At Jantar Mantar On August 7 Over LADC Concerns Seniority Must Be Determined From Date Of Substantive Appointment, Not Ad-Hoc Service: Allahabad High Court Uncorroborated Testimony Of Drug Inspector Cannot Form Sole Basis For Conviction Under Drugs Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court Suppression Of Adverse Facts Strikes At Root Of Equitable Jurisdiction: Bombay High Court Denies Injunction In HUF Property Dispute

Consistency in Victim's Testimony Crucial for Conviction in Gang Rape Case, Says Kerala High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Kerala High Court has upheld the convictions of four men in a high-profile gang rape case, rejecting the appellants' arguments regarding inconsistencies in the victim's testimony and medical evidence. The judgment, delivered by a bench comprising Justices A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Syam Kumar V.M., emphasizes the robustness of the victim's account and corroborative evidence from an eyewitness, reaffirming the legal principles surrounding the evaluation of evidence in sexual assault cases.

The case involved the abduction and gang rape of a woman by four men, referred to as A1 to A4, on February 14, 2015. The victim and another woman were taken to an isolated location under the pretext of a job offer, where the assault occurred. The prosecution relied on the testimony of the victim (PW1) and an eyewitness (PW2), along with medical reports and recovery of stolen items from the accused, to establish the guilt of the appellants.

The court underscored the importance of the victim's consistent and detailed testimony throughout the investigation and trial. Despite minor inconsistencies pointed out by the defense, the bench held that the core account of the incident remained unchanged and credible. "The consistent stand in all the statements aforementioned has been that she was sexually assaulted by a group of four persons," the judgment noted​​The court found significant corroboration in the testimony of PW2, an eyewitness who observed the incident. Her deposition that all four accused were involved in the assault was not challenged during cross-examination, thereby strengthening the prosecution's case. The court cited the Supreme Court's standard for a "sterling witness" to validate the reliability of PW2's testimony​​.

Addressing the defense's argument about discrepancies in medical reports, the court acknowledged minor variations but dismissed them as insufficient to undermine the victim's testimony. The judgment emphasized that the injuries recorded were consistent with the victim's account of the assault, rejecting the contention that the medical evidence suggested otherwise​​.

The judgment reiterated that the testimony of a rape victim does not require corroboration if it inspires confidence and is credible. The court highlighted the principle that minor contradictions should not discredit an otherwise reliable account of the incident. "If the evidence of the prosecutrix inspires confidence, it must be relied upon without seeking corroboration of her statement in material particulars"​​.

However, the court found no substantial evidence to support the charge of conspiracy under Section 120B of the IPC against the accused, leading to their acquittal on that count. The court clarified that an agreement to commit an offense must be established independently, which was not done in this case​​.

Justice Nambiar remarked, "The unimpeached testimony of PW2, who is an eye-witness to the incident, satisfies the requirements of the testimony of a sterling witness... The court considering the version of such witness should be in a position to accept it for its face value without any hesitation"​​.

The Kerala High Court's affirmation of the lower courts' findings in this gang rape case sends a strong message about the reliability of victim testimonies and the corroborative value of eyewitness accounts. This judgment reinforces the judiciary's commitment to upholding justice in cases of sexual violence and is expected to influence the handling of similar cases in the future, ensuring that credible victim testimonies are given due weight.

 

Date of Decision: June 12, 2024

State of Kerala vs. Athul and Others

Latest Legal News