High Court, As A Constitutional Court Of Record, Possesses The Inherent Power To Correct Its Own Record: Bombay High Court High Court of Uttarakhand Acquits Defendants in High-Profile Murder Case, Cites Lack of Evidence In Cases of Financial Distress, Imposing A Mandatory Deposit Under Negotiable Instruments Act May Jeopardize Appellant’s Right To Appeal: Rajasthan High Court Patna High Court Acquits Accused, Questions “Capacity of Victim to Make Coherent Statement” with 100% Burn Injuries High Court of Himachal Pradesh Dismisses Bail Plea in ₹200 Crore Scholarship Scam: Rajdeep Singh Case Execution of Conveyance Ends Arbitration Clause; Appeal for Arbitration Rejected: Bombay High Court Allahabad High Court Denies Tax Refund for Hybrid Vehicle Purchased Before Electric Vehicle Exemption Policy Entering A Room with Someone Cannot, By Any Stretch Of Imagination, Be Considered Consent For Sexual Intercourse: Bombay High Court No Specific Format Needed for Dying Declaration, Focus on Mental State and Voluntariness: Calcutta High Court Delhi High Court Allows Direct Appeal Under DVAT Act Without Tribunal Reference for Pre-2005 Tax Periods NDPS | Mere Registration of Cases Does Not Override Presumption of Innocence: Himachal Pradesh High Court No Previous Antecedents and No Communal Tension: High Court Grants Bail in Caste-Based Abuse Case Detention of Petitioner Would Amount to Pre-Trial Punishment: Karnataka High Court Grants Bail in Dowry Harassment Case Loss of Confidence Must Be Objectively Proven to Deny Reinstatement: Kerala High Court Reinstates Workman After Flawed Domestic Enquiry Procedural lapses should not deny justice: Andhra High Court Enhances Compensation in Motor Accident Case Canteen Subsidy Constitutes Part of Dearness Allowance Under EPF Act: Gujarat High Court Concurrent Findings Demonstrate Credibility – Jharkhand High Court Affirms Conviction in Cheating Case 125 Cr.P.C | Financial responsibility towards dependents cannot be shirked due to personal obligations: Punjab and Haryana High Court Mere Acceptance of Money Without Proof of Demand is Not Sufficient to Establish Corruption Charges Gujrat High Court Evidence Insufficient to Support Claims: Orissa High Court Affirms Appellate Court’s Reversal in Wrongful Confinement and Defamation Case Harmonious Interpretation of PWDV Act and Senior Citizens Act is Crucial: Kerala High Court in Domestic Violence Case

Delay in lodging FIR cannot be used as a ritualistic formula for discarding the prosecution Case: Delhi High Court Reverses Acquittal of Father Accused of Assaulting Minor Daughter

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The High Court of Delhi held that delay in filing the FIR is not fatal in cases of sexual assault, particularly involving family members, if the delay is satisfactorily explained. This reversal of acquittal was based on the credibility and consistency of the victim's testimony, supported by medical and corroborative evidence.

The case involves the respondent P.D.D., who was acquitted by the Trial Court on charges of aggravated penetrative sexual assault on his minor daughter, threats, and physical assault on his wife and son. The State and the victim, along with her mother and brother, appealed against the acquittal.

Explanation of Delay: The Court acknowledged the victim's delay in reporting the incidents due to fear and familial pressure. The High Court emphasized that the social stigma and fear of retribution often prevent immediate reporting.

Legal Precedents: The Court referred to various judgments (e.g., Tulshidas Kanolkar vs. The State of Goa) supporting that delay in filing FIR in sexual assault cases can be condoned if satisfactorily explained.

Victim's Testimony: The Court found the victim's testimony consistent and credible. Minor discrepancies in her statements were deemed trivial and not undermining her overall credibility.

Corroborative Evidence: The victim's testimony was corroborated by her mother and brother, as well as medical evidence. The Court emphasized that the victim's testimony alone, if found reliable, could suffice for conviction.

Misinterpretation by Trial Court: The High Court criticized the Trial Court for placing undue emphasis on minor contradictions and misinterpreting the evidence. The Trial Court's judgment was deemed based on conjectures.

Statutory Presumptions: The High Court highlighted the presumptions under Sections 29 and 30 of the POCSO Act, which mandate the court to presume the accused's guilt unless proven otherwise.

False Implication Argument: The defense's argument that the case was fabricated due to matrimonial discord was rejected. The Court found no convincing evidence of false implication.

Decision: The High Court reversed the acquittal, convicting the respondent under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, and Sections 506 and 323 of the IPC. The matter was scheduled for arguments on sentencing, and directions were issued for a victim impact report and confirmation of interim compensation.

Date of Decision: May 14, 2024

State vs. P.D.D.

Similar News