Supreme Court: Multiple Cases Alone Cannot Justify an Externment Order  ||  Supreme Court: Certiorari Can Quash a Tribunal Decision That is Grossly Perverse  ||  Supreme Court: Informant’s Consent is Not Required to Quash a Case Settled With the Victim  ||  Madras High Court: False Posts Against a Minister are Not an Offence Without Intent to Cause Alarm  ||  Delhi High Court: Police Cannot Pick and Choose Among Accused Persons for Arrest  ||  J&K High Court: Bar Associations are Not ‘State’ under Article 12 and are Outside Writ Jurisdiction  ||  Calcutta High Court: Third Parties Can Challenge Inaction Against Unauthorised Construction  ||  Madras High Court: Being an Advocate Does Not Mean a Person Cannot Commit an Offence  ||  Delhi High Court: Husband Cannot Reopen Settled Marital Disputes to Avoid Maintenance Liability  ||  Calcutta High Court: State Cannot Deny CRMI Seats to Foreign Medical Graduates Citing Stipend Costs    

Shamim Anwar Khan v. State of Maharashtra - (17 Jul 2015)

The perils of condning martyrdom

MANU/MH/1725/2015

Criminal

The Bombay High Court recently convicted a person on the basis of the sole witness testimony of the prosecutrix, an adolescent teen who was raped repeatedly by the accused, and as a result gave birth to a child. Given that the prosecution's case rested heavily on the sole witness testimony of the prosecutrix, the Court was inclined to note, “ there was absolutely no reason for either the Prosecutrix or her mother also to implicate the [accused] falsely, which was as good as breaking their own home and the stability of domestic life”. Of note: the accused was the prosecutrix's step-father, who married her mother after the death of her father.

Relevant : 'Inspiring confidence' is a tag used by courts when they delve into the veracity of a witness statement. With much evidence pointing towards the accused, it was clearly easier for the court to be inspired, particularly considering the uncomfortably claustrophobic facts of the case. But, is it a dangerous precedent? What about situations where the witness statement of an alleged victim of an allegedly heinous crime is not corroborated by a living and breathing bundle of evidence? Self-destruction may have been enough to construe genuineness here, but is it always such a polar fief of right and wrong. Section 498A of the IPC may have begun belatedly with the noblest of intentions, but does an unwillingness to destroy their own home always convince courts of the truth of a dowry complaint? As the incidence of rape cases increases, courts will twiddle in hope that the taking away of some of the stigma does not prompt the more opportunistic to 'self-destroy'.

Tags : CRIMINAL   RAPE   SOLE WITNESS  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved