Read Time: 07 minutes

Synopsis

The  Kerala High Court has observed that no parents would willingly file a false claim alleging that their unmarried daughter was raped, while upholding the conviction of a 27-year-old man for the rape and sexual abuse of a 13-year-old girl on multiple occasions.

The Division Bench comprising Justice P.B. Suresh Kumar and Justice M.B. Snehalatha, made the observation while hearing a case involving an appeal by the accused against his conviction and sentence under Sections 450 (house trespass to commit an offence punishable with life imprisonment), 376 (punishment for rape), and 392 (punishment for robbery) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The trial court had sentenced the accused to life imprisonment and fines under Section 376, and to five years of imprisonment and fines each under Sections 450 and 392.

The accused argued that the case was fabricated by the victim’s parents to disrupt a romantic relationship between the accused and the victim. However, the court dismissed this argument, stating that “No parents would come forward with a case of rape just to make a humiliating situation against the honour of the family. Why should a girl of 13 and her family lay false complaint against a person alleging rape without any rhyme or reason and invite dishonour and shame to the family? In the normal course of human conduct, no parents would come forward with a false case that their unmarried daughter was raped.”

The prosecution's case revealed that the accused befriended the victim on Facebook when she was in 9th grade, posing as a senior student from her school to gain her trust. Once the victim uncovered the deception, she distanced herself, prompting the accused to trespass into her home and rape her in March 2012. He allegedly continued to sexually assault and threaten her from March to September 2012.

The court noted : “The contention put forward by the accused that the parents of the girl foisted a false case against the accused since the accused refused to withdraw from the love affair, is devoid of any merit.”

The court also highlighted that the accused committed theft at the victim’s house, with evidence including gold ornaments he had pledged and an ATM card belonging to the victim’s mother found in his possession.

The court further clarified that any alleged romantic relationship was irrelevant given the victim’s age, stating, “Even if there was a romantic relationship between the accused and the prosecutrix, who was a minor aged 13, it does not legalize the crime committed by the accused.”

The court found the victim’s testimony, corroborated by her parents and medical evidence, credible and consistent. It noted that the victim was coerced into silence through threats, including the accused’s warning that he would publish explicit photos and harm her family. Further, it condoned the six-month delay in filing the FIR, given the victim’s vulnerable age.

The court reduced the original life sentence under Section 376 to ten years of rigorous imprisonment and imposed a fine of ₹50,000. The convictions under Sections 450 and 392 were upheld.

The appeal was allowed in part, recognising the gravity of the crimes while granting some relief in sentencing.

 

Cause Title: Ratheesh @ Akku v. State of Kerala [CRL.A NO. 886 OF 2017]