‘Doubting rape survivor adds insult to injury’: HC rejects Pocso convict’s plea

Raipur: The Chhattisgarh high court dismissed a criminal appeal filed by a man convicted of raping his minor niece, strongly reiterating that refusing to rely on the testimony of a sexual assault survivor merely for want of corroboration amounts to "adding insult to injury" in a tradition-bound Indian society and fear of social ostracisation. The bench noted that in India's non-permissive social milieu, a girl or woman would be extremely reluctant to disclose an incident that reflects on her chastity, due to fear of social ostracisation. Therefore, when such an offence is reported, there is an "inbuilt assurance" that the allegation is genuine rather than fabricated.A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal upheld the conviction and 25-year rigorous imprisonment awarded to the appellant under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The court found no merit in the challenge to the Feb 4, 2025 judgment of the POCSO court in Korba."The evidence of a survivor of a sex offence is entitled to great weight, absence of corroboration notwithstanding," the court observed, emphasising that a rape survivor is not an accomplice but a survivor. The judges underlined that insisting on corroboration as a rule is neither mandated by law nor desirable, and courts must treat the testimony of a sexual assault survivor at par with that of an injured witness.The prosecution case dates back to Jan 2022, when the minor informed her mother over the phone that she was sexually assaulted by her elder paternal uncle at their Korba residence. The FIR was lodged the next day. Medical examination revealed fresh external and internal genital injuries consistent with recent sexual assault, while forensic reports confirmed the crime as well.The defence claimed false implication due to an alleged family dispute and argued that the survivor's statement was influenced by her mother. It also questioned the determination of the survivor's age. However, the HC rejected these contentions, holding that documentary evidence conclusively established the survivor's age as 13 years at the time of the offence.Citing a series of Supreme Court judgments, including Rameshwar v. State of Rajasthan, Ranjit Hazarika v. State of Assam, and Rai Sandeep @ Deenu v. State of NCT of Delhi, the bench reaffirmed that corroboration is not a sine qua non for conviction in rape cases. The court stressed that if the survivor's testimony is natural, consistent, and withstands cross-examination, it can by itself form the basis of conviction.The judges also referred to recent Supreme Court rulings underscoring the need for strict and uncompromising application of the POCSO Act, observing that sexual offences against children are crimes against humanity and demand a stringent judicial response.After examining the survivor's testimony, medical and forensic evidence, and the overall circumstances, the HC concluded that the prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. Finding no illegality or perversity in the trial court's findings, the bench dismissed the criminal appeal and directed that the appellant continue to serve the sentence. This criminal appeal challenged the judgment dated February 4, 2025, by the Additional Sessions Judge, FTSC (POCSO), Korba, in Special Case (POCSO), convicting the appellant under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and sentencing him to 25 years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs 2,000, and a further six months' RI in default.