Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

The Kerala High Court upheld the conviction of a man for raping and impregnating his daughter aged 13 years. The court rejected the appeal filed by the accused, stating that the prosecution had proved the guilt of the appellant beyond doubt.

The court, presided over by Justice P.G. Ajithkumar, ruled that the survivor can be termed as a “witness of sterling quality” and a conviction can be based on her testimony. The court further held that the survivor, being the daughter of the accused, cannot be expected to falsely implicate him.

The accused, Abdul Salam, was found guilty of repeatedly raping his minor daughter during ramadan season, who consequently became pregnant and delivered a girl child at the Medical College Hospital, Kozhikode. The accused was convicted by the Sessions Court, Manjeri and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years along with a fine of ten thousand rupees. The trial court had convicted the father based on the testimony of the survivor, her mother, and a doctor who confirmed the pregnancy.

However, the accused appealed against this decision, denying the charges against him and alleging that the victim's half brother, Mujeeb, from her mother's previous marriage, was responsible for the pregnancy. The accused further contented that he was being implicated by the survivor on the persuasion of her mother, the accused’s wife, in order to save Mujeeb.

The court rejected this alternate theory, stating that there was no evidence to support it. The court noted, “The suggestions to PW1 (Survivor) and PW5 (Survivor’s mother) about the close interaction of PW1 with Mujeeb and the possibility of Mujeeb having sexual contact with PW1 are not supported by even remote probability.”

The court observed that the survivor's testimony was consistent and clear, and that she had narrated the incidents of sexual abuse in detail. The court also noted that the survivor's mother had corroborated her testimony, stating that she had taken her daughter to the hospital after noticing her abdominal distension. Significantly, the court highlighted that the accused, despite being the father, did not inform the police about the survivor's pregnancy. Instead, he suggested taking her to a hospital for an abortion. “If he was innocent, he would have immediately informed the matter in police. He did not,” the court remarked.

Relying on the Apex court’s verdict in Nirmal Premkumar and another v. State (2024), State of H.P. v. Raghubir Singh (1993), and Rai Sandeep v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2012), the court noted : “Evidence of the victim of sexual assault is enough for conviction and it does not require any corroboration unless there are compelling reasons for seeking corroboration.”

Finding that interference to the judgment of conviction was not warranted as it was based on reliable and corroborated evidence, the court upheld the conviction and dismissed the appeal filed by the accused.

 

Cause Title: Abdul Salam v State of Kerala [CRL.APPEAL NO. 94 OF 2014]

Appearance: Advocates Babu S. Nair and Smitha Babu represented the Accused/Appellant and Senior Public Prosecutor C N Prabhakaran appeared for the State.