Sole Testimony of Rape Survivor Is Sufficient for Conviction: Delhi High Court Affirms Conviction

“To Insist on Corroboration... Is to Insult Womanhood”: Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of the appellant under Section 376 IPC, while modifying his sentence from 10 years to 6 years rigorous imprisonment. Justice Rajneesh Kumar Gupta observed that the testimony of the prosecutrix was “clear, reliable and trustworthy” and needed no corroboration.

“It is a well-settled law that the Appellant can be convicted on the sole testimony of the Prosecutrix, provided that such testimony is unimpeachable, consistent, and without any ambiguity”.

“Accused Used to Tie Her Mouth and Hands... and Commit Rape Upon Her”: Court Relies on Graphic and Consistent Testimony

The victim, aged around 17 at the time of the incident, testified that the accused—her mother’s live-in partner—had been raping her for over two years from 2002 to 2004 in their residences at Qutubgarh and later Narela, Delhi. She stated:

“Accused-Mithlesh used to beat the prosecutrix and her mother with chappals and belts, and threatened her not to tell anyone... Accused used to tie her mouth and hands and legs with chunni and then used to commit rape upon her”.

She narrated how he raped her even in her mother's presence and that she finally reported the matter when her mother was out and he assaulted her again.

“Absence of Injury Not Fatal to Rape Conviction”: Court Relies on Lalliram v. State of M.P.

Rejecting the defence argument that medical reports showed no external injuries, the Court cited the Supreme Court’s ruling in Lalliram v. State of M.P.:

“Presence of injuries is not a sine qua non for determining whether the offence of rape has been committed”.

The medical examination corroborated the statement of the prosecutrix by noting a torn hymen.

“To Equate Victim With Accomplice Is an Insult to Womanhood”: Court Quotes Sanjay Kumar Judgment

In reaffirming the sufficiency of the prosecutrix's statement, the Court referred to the Supreme Court’s emphatic stance:

“To insist on corroboration, except in the rarest of rare cases, is to equate one who is a victim of the lust of another with an accomplice to a crime and thereby insult womanhood”.

“Mother’s Testimony Does Not Shake Prosecutrix’s Credibility”: Court Rejects Defence of False Implication

Though the mother admitted she was living as the wife of the accused and may have pressured her daughter to lodge a complaint, the Court dismissed this as immaterial:

“PW-2 was living with the Appellant as his wife, and therefore, it is quite probable that she may have in her testimony tried to save the Appellant. Moreover, it also does not impact the credibility of the testimony of the prosecutrix”.

Sentence Reduced to 6 Years Considering Delay and Family Circumstances

Considering that the offence occurred in 2004, and the conviction was passed in 2006, with the appeal pending for nearly 19 years, the Court held:

“This reduction of sentence is on account of the mitigating circumstances... and it does not, in any manner, impact the seriousness of the offence”.

The appellant, who had already served over 4 years and 7 months in custody, was directed to surrender within 3 days, failing which the trial court was to take appropriate steps.