Limitation | Delay Condonation Cannot Be An Act Of Generosity: Supreme Court Refuses To Condone 31-Year Delay To Challenge Decree Sentence Suspension In Murder Cases Only Under Exceptional Circumstances; Presumption Of Innocence Erased Upon Conviction: Supreme Court Inquiry Commission Report Cannot Be Used For Disciplinary Action If Statutory Right To Cross-Examine Denied: Gauhati High Court Use Of Trademark On Website Accessible In India Constitutes Domestic Use, Geo-Blocking Mandatory For Territorial Restrictions: Delhi High Court Civil Court Jurisdiction To Interfere With DRT Proceedings Is Absolutely Barred Even For Third Parties: Madras High Court Adding a Prefix Can’t Erase Deceptive Similarity – Delhi High Court Orders Removal of ‘ARUN’ from Trademark ‘AiC ARUN’ Cannot Resile From Mediated Settlement After Taking Benefits: Supreme Court Quashes Wife's DV Case, Grants Divorce Absolute Indemnity Obligation Triggers Immediately Upon Court-Directed Deposit, Not On Final Appeal: Supreme Court Magistrate Directing Investigation Under Section 156(3) CrPC Only Requires Prima Facie Satisfaction Of Cognizable Offence: Supreme Court Cancellation Of Sale Deed Under Specific Relief Act Not A Pre-Condition To Initiate Criminal Case For Forgery: Supreme Court Amalgamated Company Cannot Claim Set-Off Of Predecessor's Losses Under Kerala Agricultural Income Tax Act Without Specific Statutory Provision: Supreme Court Overlapping Split Chargesheets May Raise Double Jeopardy Concerns, Supreme Court Notes While Granting Bail To Former Jharkhand Minister Supreme Court Grants Bail To Convicted Ex-Jharkhand Minister Facing Overlapping Prosecutions From Split Chargesheets Electricity Act Appellate Authority Is A Quasi-Judicial Body Subject To High Court’s Supervisory Jurisdiction: Madhya Pradesh High Court Mere Discrepancy In Date Of Birth Across Certificates Doesn't Amount To Fraud If No Undue Advantage Is Derived: Allahabad High Court Interest Earned On Funds Temporarily Parked Pending Project Deployment Cannot Be Taxed As 'Income From Other Sources': Delhi High Court Reference Court Cannot Set Aside Collector's Award Or Remand Matter For Fresh Determination: Allahabad High Court Administrative Transfer Causing Revenue Loss Defies Court Process: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Ferry Ghat Handover Government Can Resume Leased Land For Public Purpose; 'Substantial Compliance' Of 60-Day Notice Sufficient: Kerala High Court Revenue Can't Cite Pending Litigation to Justify One Year of Adjudication Inaction: Karnataka High Court

Sole Testimony of the Prosecutrix, if Reliable, is Sufficient for Conviction: Chhattisgarh High Court Upholds Conviction in Sexual Assault Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Chhattisgarh High Court dismissed the appeal in CRA No. 1188 of 2022, upholding the conviction of Lalchand Rohra under sections 376(2)(f)(n), 376(a)(b) of the IPC and Section 5(L)(M)(N), 6 of the POCSO Act. The court reinforced the principle that the cogent and credible testimony of a minor victim is sufficient for conviction in cases of sexual assault, even in the absence of corroborative physical injuries.

The appellant, Lalchand Rohra, was accused and convicted of sexually assaulting his minor daughter repeatedly. The trial was based largely on the victim's testimony, which was found to be consistent and reliable despite the absence of physical evidence of assault. The key issue in the appeal was whether the testimony of the minor alone was sufficient to uphold the conviction given the absence of physical injuries.

The court noted that the testimony of the victim was consistent with her statements during the investigation and trial. Despite typical variations expected from a young child's account, her detailed and unchallenged narrations of the incidents formed a reliable basis for conviction.

The judgment cited multiple precedents from the Supreme Court affirming the sufficiency of a minor victim’s testimony as the sole basis for conviction in sexual assault cases. The court emphasized the severe impact of such crimes on minors and underscored the judiciary's responsibility in safeguarding their rights under the POCSO Act and IPC.

The court rejected the appellant’s claims of false implication, pointing out that the medical evidence did not negate the occurrence of sexual assault as the absence of physical injury does not conclusively rule out assault.

Decision: The High Court upheld the life imprisonment sentence and fines imposed by the trial court, dismissing the appeal for lack of merit and supporting the conviction based solely on the credible testimony of the minor victim.

Date of Decision: 09 April 2024

Lalchand Rohra vs State of Chhattisgarh

 

Latest Legal News