24 May 1983
Supreme Court
Download

BHARWADA BHOGINBHAI HIRJIBHAI Vs STATE OF GUJARAT

Bench: THAKKAR,M.P. (J)
Case number: Appeal Civil 68 of 1977


1

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 11  

PETITIONER: BHARWADA BHOGINBHAI HIRJIBHAI

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF GUJARAT

DATE OF JUDGMENT24/05/1983

BENCH: THAKKAR, M.P. (J) BENCH: THAKKAR, M.P. (J) SEN, A.P. (J)

CITATION:  1983 AIR  753            1983 SCR  (3) 280  1983 SCC  (3) 217        1983 SCALE  (1)665  CITATOR INFO :  RF         1988 SC 696  (10,14)  R          1988 SC1883  (247)  R          1989 SC1890  (27)  R          1990 SC 658  (14,19)

ACT:      Constitution of  India, 1950,  Article  136  read  with order  XXI  of  the  Supreme  Court  Rules,  7966-Concurrent finding of  fact, when  can be reopened by the Supreme Court in an appeal by Special Leave, explained.      Evidence - Reappreciation of evidence in the context of minor discrepancies, explained.      Evidence-Corroborative evidence  in rape cases-Whether, when and  to what extent corroboration to the testimony of a victim of rape is essential to establish the charge.

HEADNOTE:      The appellant,  a government  servant employed  in  the Sachivalaya at Gandhinagar was found guilty, by the Sessions Judge, Mehsna,  of serious  charges of  sexual  misbehaviour with two  young girls (aged about 10 or 12 and was convicted for the offence of rape, outraging the modesty of women, and wrongful confinement  The appeal  carried to  the High Court substantially failed.  The High Court affirmed the orders of conviction under section 342 I.P.C. for wrongfully confining the girls  and  conviction  under  Section  354  I.P.C.  for outraging the  modesty of  the two girls. With regard to the more serious  charge of  rape on  one of the girls, the High Court came  to the  conclusion that  what was established by evidence was an offence or attempt to commit rape and not of rape. Accordingly,  the conviction  under  Section  376  was altered into  one under  Section 376  read with Section Sl I I.P.C.      Dismissing the appeal and maintaining the conviction on all counts, Court ^      HELD: 1:1  A concurrent  finding of fact as recorded by the Sessions Court and affirmed by the High Court, cannot be reopened  in  an  appeal  by  Special  Leave  unless  it  is established (1)  that the finding is based on no evidence or (2) that  the finding  is perverse,  it  being  such  as  no reasonable person could have arrived at even if the evidence

2

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 11  

was taken  at its face value or (3) the finding is based and built on  inadmissible evidence,  which evidence if excluded from  vision,   would  negate   the  prosecution   case   or substantially discredit or impair it or (4) some vital piece of evidence  which would  tilt the  balance in favour of the convict  has   been  overlooked,   disregarded,  or  wrongly discarded. The  present is not a case of such a nature. [285 G-H, 286 A]      1:2. Discrepancies  which do  not go to the root of the matter  and   shake  the  basic  version  of  the  witnesses therefore cannot be annexed with undue 281 importance. More  so when  the all important "probabilities- factor" echoes  in favour  of the  version narrated  by  the witnesses. The  reasons are:  (1) By  and  large  a  witness cannot be  expected to  possess a photographic memory and to recall the  details of  an incident. It is not as if a video tape is  replayed on the mental screen; (2) ordinarily it so happens that  a witness  is overtaken by events. The witness could not have anticipated the occurrence which so often has an element  of  surprise.  The  mental  faculties  therefore cannot be  expected to be attuned to absorb the details; (3) The powers of observation differ from person to person. What one may notice, another may not. An object or movement might emboss its  image on  one person’s  mind whereas it might go unnoticed on  the part  of another;  (4) By and large people cannot accurately  recall a  conversation and  reproduce the very words  used by  them or  heard by  them. They  can only recall  the   main  purport   of  the  conversation.  It  is unrealistic to expect a witness to be a human tape recorder; (5) In  regard to  exact time  of an  incident, or  the time duration  of  an  occurrence,  usually,  people  make  their estimates by  guess work  on the  spur of  the moment at the time of  interrogation. And one cannot expect people to make very precise  or reliable  estimates in such matters. Again, it depends.  On the  ’timesense’ of individuals which varies from person  to person.  (6) ordinarily  a witness cannot be expected to  recall accurately  the sequence of events which take place  in rapid  succession or  in a short time span. A witness is  liable  to  get  confused,  or  mixed  up,  when interrogated  later   on;  (7)   A  witness,  though  wholly truthful, is  liable to  be overawed by the court atmosphere and the  piercing cross  examination made by counsel and out of nervousness mix up facts; get confused regarding sequence of events,  or fill  up details from imagination on the spur of moment. The subconscious mind of the witness sometimes so operates on account of the fear of looking foolish, or being disbelieved, though  the witness  is giving  a truthful  and honest account of the occurrence witnessed by him-Perhaps it is a  sort of a psychological defence mechanism activated on the spur of the moment. [286 B-H, 287 A-E]      2:1.  Corroboration  is  not  the  sine-quo-non  for  a conviction in a rape case. In the Indian setting, refusal to act on  the testimony  of a  victum of sexual assault in the absence of  corroboration as  a rule,  is adding  insult  to injury. Viewing  the evidence  of the  girl or the women who complains of  rape or  sexual molestation  with the  aid  of spectacles fitted  with lenses  tinged with doubt, disbelief or suspicion, is to justify the charge of male chauvinism in a male dominated society. [287 F. 288 C-D]      Rameshwar v.  The State of Rajasthan, [1952] S.C.R. 377 @ 386 followed.      2:2.  Corroboration  may  be  considered  essential  to establish a  sexual offence  in the  backdrop of  the social ecology of  the Western  World. It  is wholly unnecessary to

3

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 11  

import  the   said  concept  on  a  turn-key  basis  and  to transplant  it   on  the   Indian  soil  regardless  of  the altogether different atmosphere, attitudes, mores, responses of the  Indian Society,  and its  profile. The identities of the two  worlds are  different.  The  solution  of  problems cannot therefore  be idential.  It  is  conceivable  in  the Western Society  that a female may level false accusation as regards  sexual  molestation  against  a  male  for  several reasons such as:-(1) The female may be a ’gold 282 digger’ and  may well  have an  economic  motive-to  extract money by  holding out  the  gun  of  prosecution  or  public exposure;  (2)  She  may  be  suffering  from  psychological neurosis and  may seek an escape from the neurotic prison by phantasizing or  imagining a situation where she is desired, wanted and  chased, by  males. (3)  She may  want  to  wreak vengence on  the male  for real or imaginary wrongs. She may have a  grudge  against  a  particular  male,  or  males  in general, and  may have the design to square the account; (4) She may  have been  induced to  do so  in  consideration  of economic rewards,  by a  person interested  in  placing  the accused  in  a  compromising  or  embarassing  position,  on account of personal or political vendetta; (5) She may do so to gain notoriety or publicity or to appease her own ego, or to satisfy  her feeling of self-importance in the context of her inferiority  complex; (6)  She may  do so  on account of jealousy; (7)  She may  do so to win sympathy of others; (8) She may  do so  upon being  repulsed.  By  and  large  these factors  are   not  relevant   to  India,   and  the  Indian Conditions. [288 F-H, 289 A-E]      2:3. Rarely  will a  girl or a woman in India make such false allegations  of sexual assault, whether she belongs to the urban  or rural  society, or,  sophisticated, or, not-so sophisticated, or, unsophisticated society. Only very rerely can one  conceivably come  accross an  exception or  two and that too  possibily from amongst the urban elites. Because:- (1) A  girl or a woman in the tradition bound non-permissive Society of  India would be extremely reluctant even to admit that any incident which is likely to reflect on her chastity had ever  occurred; (2) She would be conscious of the danger of being  ostracised by  the Society or being looked down by the society  including by her own family members, relatives, friends, and  neighbours; (3)  She would  have to  brave the whole world;  (4) She would face the risk of losing the love and respect  of her  own husband  and near relatives, and of her matrimonial  home and  happiness being shattered; (5) If she is  unmarried, she  would apprehend  that it  would  be, difficult to secure an alliance with a suitable match from a respectable or  an acceptable  family; (6)  lt would  almost inevitably and  almost invariably  result in  mental torture and suffering  to herself;  (7) The tear of being taunted by others will  always haunt  her; (8) She would feel extremely embarrassed in  relating the  incident to  others being over powered by  feeling of shame on account of the upbringing in a tradition  bound society  where by and large sex is taboo; (9)  The  natural  inclination  would  be  to  avoid  giving publicity to  the incident  lest the  family name and family honour is  brought into  controversy; (10) The parents of an unmarried girl  as also  the  husband  and  members  of  the husband’s family  of a  married woman, would also more often than not,  want to avoid publicity on account of the fear of social stigma on the family name and family honour; (11) The fear  of   the  victim   herself  being   considered  to  be promiscuous or  in some  way responsible  for  the  incident regardless of  her innocence;  (12) The  reluctance to  face

4

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 11  

interrogation by  the  investigating  agency,  to  face  the court, to  face the  cross examination  by Counsel  for  the culprit, and  the risk  of  being  disbelieved,  acts  as  a deterrent. In  view of  these factors  the victims and their relatives are  not too  keen to  bring the culprit to books. And when  in the  face of these factors the crime is brought to light  there is  a built  in assurance that the charge is genuine rather than fabricated. [289 F-H, 290 A-E] 283      2:4. On  principle the  evidence of  a victim of sexual assault stands  on par  with evidence of an injured witness. Just as  a witness who has sustained an injury (which is not shown or  believed to be self-inflicted) is the best witness in the  sense that  he is least likely to exculpate the real offender, the  evidence of  a victim  of  a  sex-offence  is entitled  to   great  weight,   absence   of   corroboration notwithstanding. And  while corroboration in the form of eye witness account  of an  independent  witness  may  often  be forthcoming in  physical assault cases, such evidence cannot be expected  in sex  offences, having  regard  to  the  very nature of  the offence.  It would therefore be adding insult to injury  to insist  on corroboration  drawing  inspiration from the  rules devised  by the courts in the Western World. [290 E-G]      2:5. Therefore,  if the evidence of the victim does not suffer from  any basic  infirmity, and  the  ’probabilities- factor’ does not render it unworth of credence, as a general rule, there  is no  reason to insist on corroboration except from the  medical evidence,  where,  having  regard  to  the circumstances of  the case, medical evidence can be expected to be  forthcoming, subject  to the following qualification: Corroboration may  be insisted  upon  when  a  woman  having attained majority  is surprised  in a  compromising position and there  is a  likelihood of  her having  levelled such an accusation on  account of the instinct of self-preservation. Or when  the ’probabilities-factor’  is found  to be  out of tune. [290 G-H, 291 A-B]      2:6. To  countenance the  suggestion,  in  the  instant case, that  the appellant  has been  falsely roped in at the instance of  the father  of P.W.  2 who was supposed to have some enmity against the appellant would be wrong. Ordinarily no parents  would do  so in Indian Society as at present and thereby bring  down their  own social status and spoil their reputation in  Society,  not  to  speak  of  the  danger  of traumatic effect on the psychology of their daughter. Having regard to  the prevailing mores of the Indian Society, it is inconceivable that  a girl  of 10  or 12 would invent on her own a  false story  of  sexual  molestation.  Moreover,  the medical evidence  fully supports  the finding  of  the  High Court that  there was an attempt to commit rape on P.W. 1 by the appellant. [291 G-H, 292 A-D]

JUDGMENT:      CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 68 of 1977.      Appeal by  Special Leave  from the  Judgment and  order dated 15th  November, 1976  of the  Gujarat  High  Court  in Criminal Appeal No. 832 of 1976.      R.H. Dhebar and B. V. Desai for the Appellant.      R.N. Poddar for the Respondent.      The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 284      THAKKAR, J. To say at the beginning what we cannot help

5

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 11  

saying at the end: human goodness has limits-human depravity has none. The need of the hour however, is not exasperation.      The need  of the hour is to mould and evolve the law so as to  make it  more sensitive and responsive to the demands of the time in order to resolve the basic problem: "Whether, when, and to what extent corroboration to the testimony of a victim of  rape is  essential to  establish the charge." And the problem has special significance for the women in India, for, while  they have  often been idolized, adored, and even worshipped, for  ages they  have  also  been  exploited  and denied even  handed justice-Sixty  crores  anxious  eyes  of Indian a  women are  therefore focussed on this problem. And to that problem we will presently address ourselves.      The learned Sessions Judge Mehsana found the appellant, a  Government   servant  employed   in  the  Sachivalaya  at Gandhinagar,   guilty   of   serious   charges   of   sexual misbenaviour with  two young girls (aged about 10 or 12) and convicted the  appellant for  the offence of rape, outraging the modesty  of women,  and wrongful confinement. The appeal carried to  the High  Court substantially  failed. The  High Court affirmed the order of conviction under Sec. 342 of the Indian Penal  Code for  wrongfully confining  the girls. The High Court also sustained the order of conviction under Sec. 354 of  the Indian  Penal Code  for outraging the modesty of the two  girls. With  regard to  the more  serious charge of rape on  one of  the girls,  the  High  Court  came  to  the conclusion that  what was  established by  evidence  was  an offence  of   attempt  to  commit  rape  and  not  of  rape. Accordingly the  conviction under  Sec. 376 was altered into one under  Sec. 376  read with  Sec. 511 of the Indian Penal Code. The  appellant has  preferred the  present appeal with special leave.      The incident  occurred on Sunday, September 7, 1975, at about 5.30  p.m. at the house of the appellant. The evidence of P.W. 1 and P.W.  2 shows  that they  went to the house of the appellant  in order  to meet  his daughter (belonging to their own  age group  of 10  or 12) who happened to be their friend. The  appellant induced  them to  enter his  house by creating an impression that she was at home, though, in fact she was not. Once they were inside, the appellant closed the door, undressed  himself in  the presence of both the girls, and exposed  himself. He  asked P.W.  2  to  indulge  in  an indecent act.  P.W. 2  started crying  and fled  from there. P.W. 1 285 however could not escape. She was pushed into a cot, and was made to  undress. The appellant sexually assaulted her. P.W. 1 was  in distress  and was  weeping as  she went  out.  She however  could  not  apprise  her  parents  about  what  had transpired because  both of  them were  out  of  Gandhinagar (they returned after 4 or 5 days).      It appears  that the  parents of  P.W.  1  as  well  as parents of  P.W. 2  wanted  to  hush  up  the  matter.  Some unexpected  developments   however  forced  the  issue.  The residents of  the locality  somehow came  to know  about the incident.  And   an  alert   Woman  Social  Worker,  P.W.  5 Kundanben, President  of the  Mahila Mandal  in  Sector  17, Gandhinagar, took  up the  cause. She  felt indignant at the way in  which the appellant had misbehaved with two girls of the age of his own daughter, who also happened to be friends of his  daughter, taking  advantage of  their  helplessness, when no one else was present. Having ascertained from P.W. 1 and P.W.  2 as  to what  had transpired,  she felt  that the appellant  should   atone  for  his  infamous  conduct.  She therefore called  on the  appellant at his house. It appears

6

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 11  

that about  500 women of the locality had also gathered near the  house   of  the   appellant.  Kundanben  requested  the appellant to apologize publicly in the presence of the woman who had  assembled there.  If the appellant had acceded to . this request possibly the matter might have rested there and might not  have come  to the  court. The appellant, however, made it a prestige issue and refused to apologize. Thereupon the police  was contacted and a complaint was lodged by P.W. 1 on  19 Sept.  1975. P.W.  1 was  then sent  to the Medical officer for  medical examination.  The  medical  examination disclosed that there was evidence to show that an attempt to commit rape  on her  had been  made a  few  days  back.  The Sessions Court  as well  as the High Court have accepted the evidence and  concluded that  the appellant  was  guilty  of sexual misbehavior  with P.W.  1 and  P.W. 2  in the  manner alleged by  the prosecution  and established by the evidence of P.W.  1 and P.W. 2. Their evidence has been considered to be worthy  of acceptance  lt is  a  pure.  finding  of  fact recorded by  the Sessions  Court and  affirmed by  the  High Court. Such  a concurrent finding of fact cannot be reopened in an  appeal by special leave unless it is established: (1) that the  finding is  based on  no evidence  or (2) that the finding is  perverse, it  being such as no reasonable person could have  arrived at even if the evidence was taken at its face value  or  (3)  the  finding  is  based  and  built  on inadmissible evidence,  which  evidence,  if  excluded  from vision, would  negate the  prosecution case or substantially discredit 286 or impair it or (43 some vital piece of evidence which would tilt  the   balance  in  favour  of  the  convict  has  been overlooked, disregarded,  or wrongly  discarded. The present is not  a case  of such  a  nature.  The  finding  of  guilt recorded by the Sessions Court as affirmed by the High Court has  been   challenged  mainly   on  the   basis  of   minor discrepancies  in  the  evidence.  We  do  not  consider  it appropriate or  permissible to  enter upon  a reappraisal or reappreciation of  the evidence  in the context of the minor discrepancies painstakingly  highlighted by  learned counsel for the  appellant. Over  much importance cannot be attached to minor discrepancies. The reasons are obvious:      (1)   By and large a witness cannot be expected to           possess a  photographic memory  and to recall           the details of an incident. It is not as if a           video tape is replayed on the mental screen.      (2)   ordinarily it  so happens  that a witness is           overtaken by  events. The  witness could  not           have  anticipated  the  occurrence  which  so           often has  an element of surprise. The mental           faculties therefore  cannot be expected to be           attuned to absorb the details.      (3)   The powers of observation differ from person           to person.  What one  may notice, another may           not. An  object or  movement might emboss its           image on  one person’s  mind whereas it might           go unnoticed on the part of another.      (4)   By and large people cannot accurately recall           a conversation  and reproduce  the very words           used by  them or heard by them. They can only           recall the  main purport of the conversation.           It is unrealistic to expect a witness to be a           human tape recorder.      (5)   In regard  to exact  time of an incident, or           the time  duration of an occurrence, usually,           people make  their estimates by guess work on

7

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 11  

         the spur  of the  moment 1.1  at the  time of           interrogation. And  one cannot  expect people           to make very precise or reliable estimates in           such matters.  Again, it depends on the time-           sense of individuals which varies from person           to person. 287      (6)   Ordinarily a  witness cannot  be expected to           recall  accurately  the  sequence  of  events           which take  place in rapid succession or in a           short time  span. A  witness is liable to get           confused, or mixed up when interrogated later           on.      (7)   A witness, though wholly truthful, is liable           to be  overawed by  the court  atmosphere and           the  piercing   cross  examination   made  by           counsel and  out of nervousness mix up facts,           get confused regarding sequence of events, or           fill up  details from imagination on the spur           of the  moment. The sub-conscious mind of the           witness sometimes  so operates  on account of           the  fear   of  looking   foolish  or   being           disbelieved though  the witness  is giving  a           truthful and honest account of the occurrence           witnessed by  him-Perhaps it  is a  sort of a           psychological defence  mechanism activated on           the spur of the moment.      Discrepancies which do not go to the root of the matter and shake  the basic  version  of  the  witnesses  therefore cannot be  annexed with  undue importance.  More so when the all important "probabilities-factor" echoes in favour of the version narrated by the witnesses.      It is  now time  to tackle the pivotal issue as regards the need  for insisting on corroboration to the testimony of the prosecutrix in sex-offences. This Court, in Rameshwar v. The State  of Rajasthan,(1)  has declared that corroboration is not the sine que-non for a conviction in a rape case. The utterance of  the Court in Rameshwar may be replayed, across the time-gap  of three  decades which have whistled past, in the inimitable  voice of  Vivian Bose,  J. who spoke for the Court           The rule,  which according  to the  cases has      hardened  into   one   of   law,   is   not   that      corroboration is  essential before  there can be a      conviction   but    that    the    necessity    of      corroboration, as  a matter  of  prudence,  except      where the  circumstances make  it safe to dispense      with it,  must be present to the mind of the judge      ....... 288      The only rule of law is that this rule of prudence      must be  present to  the mind  of the Judge or the      jury as  the case  may be  and be  understood  and      appreciated by  him or  them. There  is no rule of      practice  that  there  must,  in  every  case,  be      corroboration before  a conviction  can be allowed      to stand."      And whilst  the sands  were running  out  in  the  time glass, the  crime graph  of offences  against women in India has been  scaling new  peaks from day to day. That is why an elaborate rescanning  of the jurisprudential sky through the lenses of ’logos’ and ’ethos’, has been necessitated.      In the  Indian setting, refusal to act on the testimony of  a   victim  of   sexual  assault   in  the   absence  of corroboration as  a rule,  is adding  insult to  injury. Why

8

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 11  

should the  evidence of  the girl or the woman who complains of rape  or sexual  molestation be  viewed with  the aid  of spectacles fitted  with lenses  tinged with doubt, disbelief or suspicion  ? To  do so  is to  justify the charge of male chauvinism in  a male dominated society. We must analyze the argument in  support  of  the  need  for  corroboration  and subject it  to relentless and remorseless cross-examination. And we  must do so with a logical, and not an opiniated, eye in the  light of  probabilities with our feet firmly planted on the  soil of  India and  with our  eyes focussed  on  the Indian horizon.  We must  not be  swept off  the feet by the approach made  in the Western World which has its own social mileu, its  own social mores, its own permissive values, and its own  code  of  life.  Corroboration  may  be  considered essential to  establish a  sexual offence in the backdrop of the social  ecology of  the  Western  World.  It  is  wholly unnecessary to  import the  said concept on a turn-key basis and to  transplate it  on the  Indian soil regardless of the altogether different atmosphere, attitudes, mores, responses of the Indian Society and its profile. The identities of the two worlds  are different.  The solution  of problems cannot therefore be  identical. It  is conceivable  in the  Western Society that  a female may level false accusation as regards sexual molestation  against a  male for several reasons such as:      (1)   The female  may be  a ’gold  digger’ and may           well have an economic motive to extract money           by holding  out the  gun  of  prosecution  or           public exposure. 289      (2)   She  may  be  suffering  from  psychological           neurosis and  may seek  an  escape  from  the           neurotic prison  by phantasizing or imagining           a situation where she is desired, wanted, and           chased by males.      (3)   She may  want to  wreak vengence on the male           for real  or imaginary wrongs. She may have a           grudge against a particular male, or males in           general, and  may have  the design  to square           the account.      (4)   She may  have  been  induced  to  do  so  in           consideration  of   economic  rewards,  by  a           person interested in placing the accused in a           compromising  or   embarassing  position,  on           account of personal or political vendatta.      (5)   She may do so to gain notoriety or publicity           or to  appease her  own ego or to satisfy her           feeling of  self-importance in the context of           her inferiority complex.      (6)  She may do so on account of jealousy.      (7)  She may do so to win sympathy of others.      (8)  She may do so upon being repulsed.      By and  large these  factors are not relevant to India, and the  Indian conditions.  Without the  fear of making too wide a statements or of overstating the case, it can be said that rarely  will a  girl or  a woman  in India  make  false allegations of  sexual assault on account of any such factor as has  been just  enlisted. The statement is generally true in the  context of  the urban  as also  rural Society. It is also by  and large true in the context of the sophisticated, not so sophisticated, and unsophisticated society. Only very rarely can  one conceivably  come across an exception or two and  that  too  possibly  from  amongst  the  urban  elites. Because: (1)  A girl  or a woman in the tradition bound non- permissive Society  of India  would be  extremely  reluctant

9

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 11  

even to  admit that  any incident which is likely to reflect on  her  chastity  had  ever  occurred.  (2)  She  would  be conscious of  the danger  of being ostracised by the Society or being  looked down  by the  Society including  by her own family members,  relatives, friends  and neighbours. (3) She would have to brave the 290 whole world.  (4) She would face the risk of losing the love and respect  of her  own husband  and near relatives, and of her matrimonial  home and  happiness being shattered. (S) If she is  unmarried, she  would apprehend  that  it  would  be difficult to secure an alliance with a suitable match from a respectable or  an acceptable  family. (6)  It would  almost inevitably and  almost invariably  result in  mental torture and suffering  to herself.  (7) The fear of being taunted by others will  always haunt  her. (8) She would feel extremely embarrassed in  relating the  incident to  others being over powered by  a feeling  of shame on account of the upbringing in a  tradition bound  society where  by and  large  sex  is taboo. (9)  The natural inclination would be to avoid giving publicity to  the incident  lest the  family name and family honour is  brought into  controversy. (10) The parents of an unmarried girl  as also  the  husband  and  members  of  the husband’s family  of a  married woman  would also more often than not,  want to avoid publicity on account of the fear of social stigma on the family name and family honour. (11) The fear  of   the  victim   herself  being   considered  to  be promiscuous or  in some  way responsible  for  the  incident regardless of  her innocence.  (12) The  reluctance to  face interrogation by  the  investigating  agency,  to  face  the court, to  face the  cross examination  by Counsel  for  the culprit, and  the risk  of  being  disbelieved,  acts  as  a deterrent.      In  view   of  these  factors  the  victims  and  their relatives are  not too  keen to  bring the culprit to books. And when  in the  face of these factors the crime is brought to light  there is  a built-in  assurance that the charge is genuine rather  than fabricated..  On principle the evidence of a victim of sexual assault stands on par with evidence of an injured  witness. Just  as a witness who has sustained an injury (which is not shown or believed to be self inflicted) is the  best witness in the sense that he is least likely to exculpate the  real offender,  the evidence of a victim of a sex-offence  is   entitled  to   great  weight,  absence  of corroboration notwithstanding.  And while  corroboration  in the form  of eye  witness account  of an independent witness may often  be forthcoming  in physical  assault cases,  such evidence cannot  be expected  in sex offences, having regard to the  very nature  of the  offence. It  would therefore be adding insult  to injury  to insist on corroboration drawing inspiration from  the rules  devised by  the courts  in  the Western World.  Obseisance to  which has  perhaps  become  a habit presumably on account of the colonial hangover. We are therefore of  the opinion that if the evidence of the victim does  not   suffer  from   any  basic   infirmity,  and  the probabilities-factors  does   not  render   it  unworthy  of credence, as a general 291 rule, there  is no  reason to insist on corroboration except from the  medical evidence,  where,  having  regard  to  the circumstances of  the case, medical evidence can be expected to be  forthcoming, subject  to the following qualification: Corroboration may  be insisted  upon  when  a  woman  having attained majority  is found  in a  compromising position and there is  a  likelihood  of  her  having  levelled  such  an

10

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 10 of 11  

accusation on  account of the instinct of self-preservation. Or when  the ’probabilities-factor’  is found  to be  out of tune.      Now we return to the facts of the present case. Testing the evidence  from this  perspective, the evidence of P.W. 1 and P.W. 2 inspires confidence. The only motive suggested by defence was  that there was some history of past trade union rivalry between  the father  of P.W. 2 and the appellant. It must be  realized that having regard to the prevailing mores of the Indian Society, it is inconceivable that a girl of 10 or 12  would invent  on her  own a  false  story  of  sexual molestation. Even at the age of 10 or 12 a girl in India can be trusted  to be  aware of  the fact that the reputation of the entire  family would  be jeopardised,  upon such a story being spread.  She can be trusted to-know that in the Indian Society her  own  future  chances  of  getting  married  and settling down in a respectable or acceptable family would be greatly marred  if any  such story calling into question her chastity were to gain circulation in the Society. It is also unthinkable  that   the  parents  would  tutor  their  minor daughter to  invent such  a story in order to wreak vengence on someone.  They would not do so for the simple reason that it would  bring down  their own social status in the Society apart from  ruining the future prospects of their own child. They would also be expected to be conscious of The traumatic effect on  the psychology  of the  child and  the disastrous consequences likely  to ensue when she grows up. She herself would prefer to suffer the injury and the harassment, rather than to  undergo  the  harrowing  experience  of  lodging  a complaint in  regard to  a  charge  reflecting  on  her  own chastity. We  therefore refuse to countenance the suggestion made by  the defence  that the  appellant has  been  falsely roped in  at the  instance of  the father  of P.W. 2 who was supposed to  have some  enmity against  the appellant. It is unthinkable that  the parents  of P.W.  2 would tutor her to invent a  story of  sexual misbehavior  on the  part of  the appellant merely  in order  to implicate  him on  account of past trade  union  rivalry.  The  parents  would  have  also realized the danger of traumatic effect on the psychology of their daughter.  In fact it would have been considered to be extremely distasteful to 292 broach the subject. It is unthinkable that the parents would go to  the length  of inventing a story of sexual assault on their own  daughter and  tutor her to narrate such a version which would  bring down  their own  social status  and spoil their reputation  in Society. Ordinarily no parents would do so in  Indian society as at present. Under the circumstances the defence  version that  the father  of P.W. 2 had tutored her to concoct a false version in order to falsely implicate the appellant  must  be  unceremoniously  thrown  overboard. Besides, why  should the  parents of  P.W. 1  mar the future prospects of  their own  daughter ?  It is  not alleged that P.W. 1 had any motive to falsely implicate the appellant. So also it  is not  even suggested  why P.W.  1 should  falsely implicate  the   appellant.  From   the   stand   point   of probabilities  it   is  not   possible  to  countenance  the suggestion that a false story has been concocted in order to falsely  implicate   the  appellant.  The  medical  evidence provided by  P.W 6,  Dr. Hemangini Desai, fully supports the finding of  the High  Court that  there was  an  attempt  to commit  rape   on  P.W.   1.  Under  the  circumstances  the conclusion reached  by the High Court cannot be successfully assailed.      The only  question that now remains to be considered is

11

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 11 of 11  

as regards  the sentence.  The appellant  has behaved  in  a shockingly indecent  manner. The  magnitude of  his  offence cannot be  overemphasized m  the context of the fact that he misused his  position as a father of a girl friend of P.W. 1 and- P.W.  2. P.W.  1 and  P.W. 2  were visiting  his  house unhesitatingly because  of the  fact that  his daughter  was their friend.  To have  misused this  position  and  to-have tricked them  into entering  the house,  and to  have  taken undue advantage  of the  situation  by  subjecting  them  to sexual harassment,  is a  crime of which a serious view must be taken.  But for the following facts and circumstances, we would  not   have  countenanced   the  prayer  for  leniency addressed to  us on  behalf of  the appellant.  The  special circumstances are  these. The  appellant has lost his job in view of  the conviction  recorded by  the  High  Court.  The incident occurred some 7 years back. The appeal preferred to the High  Court was dismissed in November 15, 1976. About 6- 1/2 years  have elapsed  thereafter. In the view that we are taking the appellant will have to be sent back to jail after an interval  of about  6-1/2 years.  The appellant must have suffered great  humiliation in the Society. The prospects of getting a  suitable match  for his own daughter have perhaps been marred in view of the stigma in the wake of the finding of guilt  recorded against  him in  the context  of such  an offence. 293 Taking  into   account  the   cumulative  effect   of  these circumstances, and  an overall view of the matter, we are of the opinion  that the  ends of  Justice will be satisfied if the substantive  sentence imposed  by the High Court for the offence under  Sec. 376  read with  Sec. 511 is reduced from one of  2-1/2 years’  R. I.,  to one  of 15 months’ R.I. The sentence of  fine, and  in default  of fine,  will be course remain undisturbed.  So also  the sentence  imposed  in  the context of  the offence  under Sec.  342 and  Sec 354 of the Indian  Penal  Code  will  remain  intact.  Subject  to  the modification in  the sentence  to the  aforesaid extent  the appeal fails  and is dismissed The appellant shall surrender in order  to undergo the sentence. The bail bonds will stand cancelled. S.R.                                       Appeal dismissed. 294