In a significant ruling, the Chhattisgarh High Court has firmly upheld the conviction and life imprisonment of a man found guilty of raping a 9-year-old girl in Bilaspur district back in 2018. The court strongly emphasized that the consistent and trustworthy testimony of a minor survivor is, by itself, enough to secure a conviction under the law.
Court Dismisses Appeal, Reaffirms Trial Court's Judgment
The Division Bench, comprising Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, dismissed the appeal filed by the convict against the verdict of the Second Fast Track Special Court in Bilaspur. The trial court had sentenced him to life imprisonment "for lifetime till death" under the stringent provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. Additional sentences under Sections 363 (kidnapping) and 366 (procuration of minor girl) of the Indian Penal Code were also upheld, to run concurrently.
Key Findings on Age, Kidnapping, and Assault
The High Court addressed several critical issues raised in the appeal. On determining the victim's age, the Bench approved the trial court's reliance on the primary school admission register, which recorded her date of birth as March 16, 2009. This established her age as 9 years, 9 months, and 14 days on the date of the offence, December 30, 2018. The court found no reason to doubt this official record, entered well before the crime.
Regarding the kidnapping charge, the judges noted that the accused had enticed two minor sisters away from lawful guardianship. He sent them to buy gutkha and then lured them towards a pond, effectively removing them without consent. This act fulfilled the legal ingredients for kidnapping under Section 361/363 of the IPC.
The Bench meticulously recorded the harrowing details of the assault as narrated by the survivors. The accused made both sisters remove their clothes, assaulted the older girl, and attempted the same with the younger one, after luring them with money.
Landmark Observations on Child Testimony
Perhaps the most powerful part of the judgment is the court's clear stance on the credibility of child survivors. The Bench categorically stated that seeking corroboration of a minor's testimony as a routine rule "amounts to adding insult to injury." Relying on Supreme Court precedents, the High Court reiterated that when the evidence of a child survivor is natural, consistent, and inspires confidence, a conviction can rest solely on it.
The court rejected the defence's challenges to the survivors' credibility and arguments about the lack of ossification tests, stating that the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. This ruling reinforces the legal framework designed to protect children and ensure justice without subjecting them to unnecessary scrutiny.
