Tags:
Journalism of Courage
NEW DELHI, Oct 27: A man was sentenced to seven years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs 1,000 for raping a 13-year-old girl by a Sessions Judge.
In his 17-page order, Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Raghbir Singh stated: “… women in our society… have been the victims of tyranny at the hands of men with whom they, under the Constitution, enjoy equal status. Women have the right to life and liberty. They also have the right to be respected and treated as equal citizens….”
On March 3, 1994 Munni Devi lodged a complaint with the Ashok Vihar police that her 13-year-old daughter had been missing for 20-25 days. She suspected that her daughter had been abducted by Umesh Sharma, who used to live as a tenant in her jhuggi.
Subsequently, the police arrested Sharma, rescued the girl and registered a case (FIR no 95/94) under Sections 366 (kidnapping a woman) and 376 (rape) of the Indian Penal Code.
The girl told the Court that she was on her way to buy kerosene when she met Sharma who forcedher to come with him, saying he would kill her uncle if she didn’t. He took her to Rajasthan, while promising to provide her with better food and nice clothes. It was here that he raped her continuously for three days and even beat her, the girl told the court.
Sharma next took the girl to Muzzafarpur, where he kept her for a month in his parents’ house. When his parents told him to take her back home, he moved out of the house, rented another place and continued to rape her everyday, the victim testified. She said she endured all this because Sharma said he would sell her into prostitution if she tried to escape.
When Sharma ran out of money, he brought her back to Delhi. The two were spotted by neighbours at Indira Market in Shalimar Bagh. The police finally tracked them down on June 13, 1994.
Sharma admitted to having sexual intercourse with the teenager, but maintained that he never raped her. He said that he was in love with her that he had her mother’s consent; and that they were married and livedwith the girl’s mother for a year-and-a-half. Sharma also said that the girl’s mother soon started demanding money from him, which is way he and the girl ran away to Bihar.
But the girl told the Court that her signature on the affidavit – stating she and Sharma were married and giving her age as 21 – was obtained by coercion. She also said that Sharma bribed a lawyer to prepare the affidavit.
The ASJ had to first decide, whether the girl had been kidnapped through criminal intimidation and then forced to marry Sharma. And second, that she had been raped.
The Supreme Court (State of Maharashtra versus Chander Prakash Jain) is clear on one point: “A prosecutrix of a sex offence cannot be put on par with an accomplice. The Evidence Act nowhere says that her evidence cannot be accepted unless it is corroborated on material particulars.”
Hence, the ASJ said that since the girl was 13 year at the time, it was immaterial whether she had consented to intercourse or not, as the law states that having sexwith a woman below 16 years is rape.
