New Delhi: The Supreme Court, while confirming the punishment awarded to a man found guilty of sexually assaulting a 13-year-old girl in Tamil Nadu, held that barring serious exceptions, the “evidence of the victim of sexual assault is enough for conviction”.
According to a report in The Hindu, a three-judge bench led by Justice Ashok Bhushan said, “A woman, who is the victim of sexual assault, is not an accomplice to the crime but is a victim of another person’s lust and, therefore, her evidence need not be tested with the same amount of suspicion as that of an accomplice.”
The Madras high court had upheld the verdict of guilt under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. The verdict was based on the evidence of the victim even though her mother had turned hostile.
Referring to past judgements, the court said that it was dutybound to deal with cases involving sexual harassment or molestation, with “utmost sensitivity”.
“Minor contradictions or insignificant discrepancies in the statement of a prosecutrix should not be a ground for throwing out an otherwise reliable prosecution case,” the court said and added that the evidence of the victim of sexual assault was “enough for conviction” and did not require corroboration unless there are compelling reasons for seeking corroboration. “The statement of the prosecutrix is more reliable than that of an injured witness as she is not an accomplice,” it said.
Also read: Of Men Like Mice: The Legal System’s Historic Apathy Towards Gender Justice
Maintaining that the sole and trustworthy evidence of a woman, who is a victim of a sexual offence, is enough to find her assailant guilty, the court said, “It is observed and held by this Court that to hold an accused guilty for commission of an offence of rape, the solitary evidence of the prosecutrix is sufficient, provided the same inspires confidence and appears to be absolutely trustworthy, unblemished and should be of sterling quality.”
Referring to the State of Orissa v. Thakara Besra, the court held that rape was “not mere physical assault” but instead destroyed the whole personality of the victim. “The rapist degrades the very soul of the helpless female and, therefore, the testimony of the prosecutrix must be appreciated in the background of the entire case,” the judgement read.
