In an update that could ease a rape survivor's ordeal, the Supreme Court held that courts are not to harass victims by asking them for corroborative evidence to prove her allegations if her testimony is trustworthy. A bench of Justices AK Sikri and AM Sapre said a victim's testimony in cases of sexual offences is vital and accused can be convicted solely on the basis of her statements.
"Seeking corroboration to a statement before replying upon the same as a rule, in such cases, would literally amount to adding insult to injury. The deposition of the prosecutrix has, thus, to be taken as a whole. Needless to reiterate that the victim of rape is not an accomplice and her evidence can be acted upon withour corroboration. She stands at a higher pedestal than an injured witness does," the bench said. Justice Sikri said the evidence of the girl or the woman who complains of rape or sexual molestation should not be viewed with "the aid of spectacles fitted with lenses tinged with doubt, disbelief or suspicion."
"If the court finds it difficult to accept her version, it may seek corroboration from some evidence which lends assurance to her version. To insist on corroboration, except in the rarest of rare cases, is to equate one who is a victim of the lust of another with an accomplice to a crime and thereby insult womanhood. It would be adding insult to injury tell a woman that her claim of rape will not be believed unless it is corroborated in material particulars, as in the case of an accomplice to a crime," it said.
The order was passed while sentencing a man to twelve years of imprisonment for raping his nine year old niece. The Apex Court set aside the order of Himachal Pradesh High Court which had acquitted the accused on the ground of minor discrepancies in the statements of the girl and her mother. It had held that there was delay in lodging FIR by the victim's family as the case was registered three years after the incident. The SC bench said the rape complaint could not be declared false because of delay in lodging the case.
"A decision to lodge FIR becomes more difficult and hard when accused happens to be a family member. In fact, incestuous abuse is still regarded as a taboo to be discussed in public. This reticence hurts the victims or other family members who struggle to report. After all, in such a situation, not only the honour of the family is at stake, it may antagonize other relations as well."
