Facts
The prosecutrix is an 18 year old girl and the accused used to store his material at the prosecutrix’s house. The accused took the prosecutrix away on false pretences and later raped her. The accused was convicted by the trial court under Section 366 and 376 IPC while he was acquitted under section 3(1)(xii) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The accused’s appeal was dismissed by the High Court and hence an appeal was filed before the Supreme Court on the ground that the accused claimed to have had consensual sex with the prosecutrix and the same was proven due to the lack of injuries.
Judgment
The Court held that except in cases where there is high improbability in the prosecution’s case, convictions can be based on the sole testimony of the child survivor and ordinarily looking for corroboration in cases on sexual assault is unnecessary. The Court also noted that corroboration wasn’t mandatory and the absence of injuries wasn’t indicative of consent. The Court while upholding the conviction noted that while there had been a minor discrepancy during her cross examination, it did not in turn make her evidence unreliable.