Absence Of Injury Marks On Private Parts Does Not Disprove Rape: SC
New Delhi: Absense of injury marks on the private parts does not disprove rape, if there is other evidence against the accused, the Supreme Court has held.
The bench of Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Prasanna B Varale made this landmark observation, providing clarity for rape convictions, while dismissing an appeal by a private tutor, convicted of raping his minor student over 40 years ago.
The court also came down hard on an attempt by the defence counsel to dilute the matter by calling the survivor’s mother a ‘woman of easy virtue’.
The incident dates back to March 1984 when the minor girl went for tuitions to the house of the convict. The man sent two other students, who were present there, on errands before locking the survivor in a room and raping her. She was kept confined in the room till her grandmother arrived to take her back home.
Though the girl narrated the incident, the family faced severe opposition in the neighborhood, resulting in late filing of the FIR. The trial court convicted the tutor within two years, but it took the Allahabad High Court 25 years to dismiss his appeal. About 15 more years passed before the Supreme Court made it’s ruling.
The defence counsel submitted that the lack of injury on the private parts of the survivor indicates that it was not rape, but consensual sex. This failed to cut any ice with the judges.
“It is not necessary that in each and every case in which rape is alleged there has to be an injury to the private parts of the victim and it depends on the facts and circumstances of a particular case. We reiterate that absence of injuries on the private parts of the victim is not always fatal to the case of the prosecution,” Justice Varale observed.
The bench also held that the testimony of a rape victim holds equal weight to that of an injured witness, and that a conviction could be based on the sole testimony of the victim, as long as the evidence aligns with the narrative.
