Allahabad HC Notes Struggles Of Disadvantaged Rape Survivors In Lodging FIR
Whereas upholding the conviction of the accused in a 1996 rape case, the Allahabad Excessive Courtroom just lately made poignant observations concerning the systemic hardships confronted by rape survivors from economically and socially deprived backgrounds, which impede their entry to justice.
A bench of Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Sandeep Jain noticed that the sufferings of such victims typically start a lot earlier than the trial, that’s, on the very first step of attempting to get their voice heard by lodging an FIR concerning the incident.
“Unlucky as it’s, it’s a laborious actuality of life that at instances social and financial standing govern the destiny of residents in such issues. Deprived individuals comparable to ‘R’ (P.W.-1) and ‘S’ (P.W.-2) could also be made to attend and should thus have been compelled to make many efforts to get their FIR lodged,” the Courtroom remarked because it highlighted the limitations that marginalised victims face.
Moreover, responding to the argument raised by the defence concerning the absence of essential proof (the sufferer’s garments worn on the time of the incident) within the case, the Courtroom supplied a humane and real looking perspective on this regard.
The division bench mentioned that it’s wholly pure to count on that the rape survivor, a poor woman, would have washed her garments that she had worn on the time of the prevalence.
“It’s one other unlucky actuality of life {that a} poor sufferer of rape might not have a luxurious to maintain protected, proof of such heinous offence suffered. Clothes although a fundamental necessity of life, may be very treasured and it comes at a heavy worth to the poor,” the bench remarked.
Moreover, the Courtroom additionally addressed one other concern concerning the absence of unbiased witnesses in such instances, because it famous that the witnesses are likely to stroll away from the sufferer for his or her consolation.
It remarked thus:
“…at current, civilization values might not have refined sufficient and will not be robust sufficient for Courts to essentially count on that unbiased witnesses wouldn’t fall prey to societal pressures and practices when approached by offenders or to disregard that usually, individuals are likely to stroll away from the sufferer if not for any menace, just for the sake of private comfort and luxury, or not discovering time for Courts, as a witness.”.
Briefly put, it was the prosecution’s case that on the intervening night time of twenty sixth and twenty seventh October 1996, whereas ‘R’ (husband of the sufferer ‘S’) was away for work, the accused forcibly entered their home round 2 within the night time, caught ‘S’ by her throat, threw her down from the mattress, and forcibly dedicated rape on her.
The FIR within the matter got here to be lodged on November 9, that too after a number of makes an attempt had been made by ‘R’, who claimed as a result of the truth that the accused was a harmful particular person with legal hyperlinks and ‘R’s standing as an individual from the oppressed class, the police took no motion within the case.
Based mostly on the proof led in the course of the trial, the accused was convicted for rape, house-trespass and offence below the SC/ST Act, and was sentenced to life imprisonment alongside with tremendous.
Difficult his conviction, the accused, who remained in precise custody for about six months, moved the HC contending that the FIR is wholly belated and the prosecution’s story is inherently false and inconceivable and that no damage had been prompted to the sufferer.
On the opposite hand, the AGA for the state submitted that the assertion of the sufferer was wholly truthful and dependable, she didn’t make any materials enchancment upon the model of occasions initially narrated within the FIR and that her assertion at trial remained constant and reliable.
As for the absence of accidents on the sufferer’s physique, the AGA submitted that the FIR by no means alleged exterior accidents, and for the reason that sufferer was a married lady and mom of two youngsters and therefore, the absence of inside accidents was not materials.
Moreover, it was submitted that for the reason that FIR was lodged after 13 days, exterior accidents that will have been seen with a immediate medical examination couldn’t be confirmed.
Analysing the proof and the info of the case in addition to the encompassing circumstances, the Excessive Courtroom discovered that that the assertion of the sufferer had proved the prevalence of rape suffered by her, past an affordable doubt.
The Courtroom, nonetheless, added that because it was not proved that the offence had been dedicated on the sufferer as a result of she was a member of the Scheduled Caste, the Courtroom concluded that the offence below the SC/ST Act was not confirmed and therefore, the appellant was entitled to a transparent good thing about doubt with regard to that offence.
Moreover, noting that the appellant is about 70 years of age now and has remained confined for about six months (in all), the bench modified his sentence from ten years’ rigorous imprisonment to seven years’ easy imprisonment.
Appearances
For Appellant: Advocates Sanjeev Kumar Saxena, AK Prajapati, Anand Priya Singh
For Respondent: AGA Archana Singh
Case title – Bhagwandeen vs. State of U.P
