CHAMAN LAL versus THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

Citation: [2020] 12 S.C.R. 1000 · Decided: 03-12-2020 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ASHOK BHUSHAN · Disposal: Dismissed

cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1000
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 12 S.C.R.
CHAMAN LAL
v.
THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
(Criminal Appeal No. 1229 of 2017)
DECEMBER 03, 2020
[ASHOK BHUSHAN, R. SUBHASH REDDY AND
M. R. SHAH, JJ.]
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – ss.378, 313 – Appeal
against acquittal – FIR lodged against appellant-accused alleging
that when the prosecutrix  used to go to jungle to graze goats and
cattle, appellant also used to come there and had sexual intercourse
with her forcibly – Trial Court acquitted the appellant for offences
u/ss.376, 506, IPC on the grounds of delay in FIR and that the
prosecutrix was not of unsound mind as alleged – Acquittal reversed
by High Court – Held: It has been proved that the prosecutrix was
mentally retarded and she was not in a position to understand the
good and bad aspect of sexual assault – Appellant took
disadvantage of the mental sickness and low IQ of the prosecutrix
– He is the biological father of the child delivered by her – In his
s.313 CrPC statement, the case of the appellant was of a total denial
– It was never his case that it was a case of consent – Thus, he came
with a false defence – Considering the evidence on record, the High
Court rightly convicted the appellant for the offence u/ss. 376 and
506, IPC – Being the first appellate Court, the High Court was
justified in re-appreciating the entire evidence on record and the
reasoning given by the trial Court – Impugned judgment not
interfered with – Penal Code, 1860 – ss.375, 376, 506.
Dismissing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1 In the facts and circumstances of the case the
High Court is justified and, as such, has not committed any error
in reversing the order of acquittal passed by the trial Court and
convicting the accused for the offences under Sections 376 and
506 IPC. Being the first appellate Court, the High Court was
justified in re-appreciating the entire evidence on record and the
reasoning given by the trial Court. In the facts and circumstances
of the case, the High Court has acted within the parameters of
[2020] 12 S.C.R. 1000
1000
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1001
the law laid down by this Court. On re-appreciation of the entire
evidence on record, more particularly the deposition of doctors
examined as PW11 and PW22, the High Court has specifically
found that the IQ of the victim was 62 which was based on the
history and mental state examination of the victim. Merely
because the victim was in a position to do some household works
cannot discard the medical evidence that the victim had mild
mental retardation and she was not in a position to understand
the good and bad aspect of sexual assault. It appears that the
accused had taken disadvantage of the mental illness of the
victim. It is required to be appreciated coupled with the fact that
the accused is found to be the biological father of the baby child
delivered by the victim. Despite the above, in his 313 statement
the case of the accused was of a total denial. It was never the
case of the accused that it was a case of consent. Thus, the
accused, as such, came with a false defence. Therefore,
considering the evidence on record, more particularly the
deposition of PW11 and PW22 and even the deposition of the
other prosecution witnesses, the High Court has rightly observed
that case would fall under Section 375 IPC and has rightly
convicted the accused for the offence under Section 376 IPC.
Even as per clause fifthly of Section 375 IPC, “a man is said to
commit rape”, if with her consent when, at the time of giving
such consent, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is unable to
understand the nature and consequences of that to which she
gives consent.  As observed, even it is not the case on behalf of
the accused that it was a case of consent. The accused has taken
disadvantage of the mental sickness and low IQ of the victim.
[Para 7, 10 and 11][1008-A; 1016-D-H; 1017-A-D]
1.2 From the medical evidence, it emerges that IQ 62 falls
in the category of ‘mild mental retardation’. It has also emerged
that the mental status and IQ are determined on the basis of the
injuries and activities. IQ of a person can be known on the basis
of the questions, activities and the history of a patient. Therefore,
even if there might be some contradictions with respect to
language known by the victim, in that case also, it cannot be said
to be the major contradictions to disbelieve the entire medical
evidence on the mental status of the victim. Therefore, the High
Court is justified in re

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.