Read Time: 10 minutes

Synopsis

The Calcutta High Court recently upheld the conviction of four individuals for raping a 24/26-year-old married woman who was illiterate and the mother of two children.

The High Court found no error in the Trial Court's conviction based on the testimony of the woman's (herein victim) daughter specifically the young girl's tears and visible trauma while she was deposing in trial court.

The division bench of Justices Rai Chattopadhyay and Debangsu Basak observed that in whatever socioeconomic condition it is, a child is always blessed with the trait of innocence. It is beyond her normal disposition, to manipulate to the extent of falsely put up allegations of an offence like rape. For consecutive two days, she could not complete her evidence in Court, being overpowered by the trauma of describing her horrific experiences of her. The demeanour of the child as noted by the Court, would provide sufficient insight, for an experienced and sensitised fact finder, to unearth the truth.

The court was hearing a criminal appeal against the order dated January 09, 2022, of Additional Session Judge which convicted the four accused for an offence under section 375D of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them a rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than 20 years.
In the present case, the woman, herein the mother of the child was raped by four persons. It was submitted that on January 19, 2018, on the occasion of the immersion of goddess Saraswati, the accused allegedly entered the victim's home at 2:00 a.m. and raped her. She claimed that loudspeakers were playing when the four accused entered her home and further they forcibly took her to the area behind the home.

The Trial Court found that the statements of both the victim and the victim's minor daughter supported their case. Further, the court found the accused persons guilty of committing rape.

Therefore, the convicts approached the present bench challenging the order of the trial court.

The appellants stated that the trial Court had misjudged this aspect and unnecessarily given much leverage to the evidence of these two witnesses, only to reach an erroneous finding. Also, the evidence of the minor daughter of the victim cannot be relied upon or given any credence.

Further, it was also argued that the victim, though having explained that she could identify the accused persons at the time of occurrence, restrained herself to disclose their names, at the very first instance, before the doctor, examined her.

Counsel appearing for the victim argued that no defence case as to the existence of any animosity between the parties had been made out. It was further been argued that no defence as regards the appellants not being the perpetrator of the alleged offence or the appellants having acted upon on consent of the prosecutrix, had been made.

It was also submitted that the version of the prosecutrix could not be flawed and the trial Court had properly considered the same. It had also been stated that the trial Court had made no wrong relying on the evidence of the prosecutrix, which was worth credence, upon which the order of conviction was founded.

The present court after hearing both parties noted that the minor daughter was present at the scene of the occurrence, she was initially sleeping but awakened due to the flurry of activity in the room.

“The spontaneity of voluntary and unforced reaction of a minor child, in breaking down into tears, while deposing about the ordeal of the fateful night, suggests unfailingly to the truthfulness of the fact she has deposed. It is only due to the fact, that the scar of the turmoil has been deeply imprinted to her memory,” the court said.

“While describing the state of affairs of that night, she relives those moments again,” the court further added.

The bench stated, “The child's demeanour in court would provide sufficient insight for an experienced and sensitive fact-finder to uncover the truth. After all, the very purpose of the examination of witnesses in trial is for unveiling the truth of the matter. The demeanour noted of the child as above, is the character evidence to be used to establish that the same has rendered the minor girl o victim more prone to testify truthfully. Thus, this Court is never in two minds for the unhesitating commendation of the value or worth of evidence of this child eyewitness in due support or corroboration of the prosecutrix’s version."

Accordingly, the court upheld the conviction of the four accused and dismissed the criminal application.

Case Title: Suku Hembram & Ors. vs. The State of West Bengal