A rape survivor’s testimony can be accepted without corroboration, especially in a case where the rapist is her father, the Delhi High Court has observed.
The court’s observation came during the hearing of an appeal by a man who was held guilty of raping his 17-year-old daughter. Justice Pratibha Rani upheld his seven-year jail term, awarded by a trial court in November 2009, after holding him guilty of raping his daughter.
“While dealing with the case of rape, wherein the offender is none else but the father, the version of the prosecutrix can be accepted without corroboration. In the statement of the prosecutrix, there are no material contradictions except the date or the month. This court cannot ignore that she is illiterate and put her thumb impression on the complaint as well as on the FIR. She being illiterate may not be able to give the specific date and time or the month or the year,” the court said.
Medical evidence
The man had challenged his conviction, pointing out discrepancies in his daughter’s testimony. The court, however, refused to accept the assertions noting that the discrepancies were minor and the complainant’s testimony was largely reliable. It noted that evidence established that she was raped by her father.
“Medical evidence corroborated her testimony to the extent that her hymen was found ruptured. Minor contradictions or discrepancy appearing in her statement, as pointed out by counsel for the appellant cannot be treated as grounds for disregarding otherwise reliable testimony, which proved the prosecution case beyond reasonable doubt,” the court noted.
As per the prosecution, the man raped his daughter regularly after the death his wife in 2008 and would beat her if she resisted.
