Conviction For Sexual Assault Can Be Based Solely On Reliable Testimony Of Victim Without Corroboration: Allahabad High Court

"Statement of the prosecutrix, if found to be worthy of credence and reliable, requires no corroboration. The court can record conviction of the accused on the sole testimony of the prosecutrix," Allahabad High Court, in a latest judgment, has reaffirmed the settled legal principle that a conviction for rape can be sustained based on the solitary testimony of the victim if it is found to be "wholly reliable."

A bench of Justice Siddhartha Varma and Justice Jai Krishna Upadhyay observed that the evidence of a victim of sexual assault stands on a higher pedestal, similar to that of an injured witness, and does not require external corroboration if it inspires total confidence.

The court dismissed a criminal appeal filed by one Kiranpal alias Kiran, who was sentenced to life imprisonment for the abduction and rape of a minor girl in 2014. The bench noted that in cases of sexual offences committed in seclusion, the testimony of the victim is vital and can form the sole basis for sentencing a man to life imprisonment.

The case originated from an incident in July 2014 in District Muzaffarnagar, where a 10-year-old girl was abducted from her home during the night. She was discovered the following morning near a village school in a critical condition, having been subjected to physical assault and rape. Upon regaining consciousness, the victim identified the appellant, her neighbor, as the perpetrator. The Trial Court convicted the appellant under Sections 376, 323 of the IPC and Sections 5/6 of the POCSO Act.

The primary question before the court was whether the testimony of the minor victim could be considered "wholly reliable" to sustain a conviction without further corroboration. The court was also called upon to determine if the medical evidence and forensic reports sufficiently supported the oral testimony provided by the prosecution witnesses.

Victim’s Testimony Equivalent To Injured Witness

The court emphasized that the evidence of a prosecutrix in a rape case is most vital. Relying on the Supreme Court precedent in Hem Raj v. State of Haryana, the bench noted that such weight is given to the victim's evidence because it is on par with the evidence of an injured witness, which seldom fails to inspire confidence.

The bench observed that while the court must scrutinize such evidence with care and circumspection, once it is satisfied about the creditworthiness of the statement, no further corroboration is required by law. The court noted that a victim of sexual assault is not an accomplice but a victim of a crime.

Classification Of Oral Testimony

The court revisited the classification of oral testimony into three categories: wholly reliable, wholly unreliable, and neither wholly reliable nor wholly unreliable. It held that in the case of a "wholly reliable" single witness, the conviction can be founded without corroboration, and this principle applies with greater vigour when the offence is committed in seclusion.

"The court has no option than to acquit the accused only in cases where the prosecution is based on wholly unreliable testimony of a single witness."

Victim Characterized As ‘Sterling Witness’

In the present case, the court found the testimony of the victim (PW-2) to be natural and consistent. Despite a detailed cross-examination by the defense, no facts emerged that could adversely impact her testimony. The bench characterized the victim as a "sterling witness" who had identified the appellant with clarity.

The court noted that the victim had recognized the appellant in the light of an electricity bulb at the time of the abduction. Her statement remained consistent from the starting point of the investigation until the conclusion of the trial, making her evidence worthy of full credence.

Medical Evidence Corroborates Oral Version

The court rejected the appellant's contention that medical evidence did not support the case. Referring to the testimony of Dr. Abha Aatrey (PW-3), the court noted the presence of eleven injuries, including a lacerated hymen and internal redness. The medical expert had clearly stated that the injuries were possible to have been caused by a penis during the time of the incident.

"The findings recorded by trial court are based on correct appreciation of facts, evidence and law and do not suffer from any infirmity or illegality."

Stringent Objectives Of The POCSO Act

The bench remarked on the gruesome nature of the crime, noting that the POCSO Act was specifically enacted to provide stringent punishments for offences against children. It observed that the impact of such an "obnoxious act" on the mind of a minor victim is life-long and adversely affects their healthy growth.

Since there was no dispute regarding the age of the victim being less than twelve years at the time of the incident, the court held that the crime called for the most stringent punishment possible under the law.

Concluding that the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt, the High Court found no substance in the arguments raised by the appellant's counsel. The court affirmed the judgment of the Special POCSO Judge, Muzaffarnagar, and dismissed the appeal. The appellant, who is already in jail, was ordered to serve the remainder of his life sentence.

Date of Decision: June 03, 2026