Non-injury to rape victim does not signify consent — SC

"Courts have to display a greater sense of responsibility and be more sensitive while dealing with charges of sexual assault on women", a division bench comprising Justices R C Lahoti and S N Variava said in its judgement.

Rajasthan Government had come in an appeal against the High Court order reversing a sessions court judgement which had sentenced a man to seven years’ rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs 2,000 holding him guilty of raping a minor.

The Sessions court had relied on the testimony of the 15-year-old victim and her father and it was corroborated by medical evidence that the accused had sexual intercourse with the victim by force. But the High Court had also said that lodging of FIR was delayed and the person to whom the woman narrated her story was not examined by the prosecution.

"An unmerited acquittal encourages wolves in the society being on prowl for easy preys, more so when the victims of crime are helpless females. It is the spurt in the number of unmerited acquittals recorded by criminal courts which gives rise to the demand for death sentence to rapists, the bench said in the judgement.

The bench said, "If the prosecution has succeeded in making out a convincing case for recording a finding as to the accused being guilty, the court should not lean in favour of the acquittal by giving weight to irrelevant or insignificant circumstances".

The bench said the delay in registration of the case had been satisfactorily explained and "mere delay in lodging of the FIR is no ground by itself for throwing the entire prosecution case overboard." It further held that it would have been better if the woman before whom she had narrated the story could be examined but no dent was caused in the prosecution case by her non-examination.