New Delhi, December 11
The Supreme Court in an important judgement has held that a rape accused cannot be allowed to take “loose moral” character of a
woman as defence for acquittal in the case as such a view was “indefensible”.
A view that the girl was of “loose morals and easy virtues” and the accused was entitled to acquittal on this ground was “indefensible”, a Bench of Mr Justice Arijit Pasayat and Mr Justice S H Kapaida said, while criticising the Allahabad High Court for exonerating two accused in a rape case on this ground.
Referring the case back to the High Court to decide it on merit, the Bench said “the appellate courts should not interfere with the findings of the trial court without indicating any reason” in such cases.
While the trial court had sentenced to five years imprisonment Pappu alias Yunis and Mannoo for raping a girl by
forcibly entering her house in broad day- light in Sitapur district on May 21, 1987, the High Court had let them off by accepting the arguments of their counsel that “the girl was of easy virtue”.
The apex court said even when the actual age of the girl — whether she was minor or adult — was in doubt, The High Court was not right in accepting such an a
argument from defence.
“If the court finds it difficult to accept the version of the rape victim on its face value, it may search for evidence, direct or
circumstantial, which would lend assurance to her testimony. Assurance, short of corroboration as understood in the context of an accomplice (in the act) would do,” the apex court said.
It was a well settled law that when a woman has lodged a complaint about her being subjected to the offence of rape, she no more
remained an accomplice, the Court said.
“There is no rule of law that her testimony cannot be acted upon without corroboration in material particulars.
She stands at a higher pedestal than an injured witness,” the Court said adding in the offence of rape “injury to the victim is both physical as well as psychological and emotional.”
