STATE OF MAHARASHTRA versus CHANDRAPRAKASH KEWAL CHAND JAIN

Citation: [1990] 1 S.C.R. 115 · Decided: 18-01-1990 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.M. AHMADI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

STAIB OF MAHARASHTRA 
A 
v. 
CHANDRAPRAKASH KEWAL CHAND JAIN 
JANUARY 18, 1990 
[A.M. AHMADI AND M. FATHIMA BEEVI, JJ.] 
B 
Indian Evidence Act-Sections 39, 114, 118 and 133--Victim of sex 
offence-Victim of crime-Court to evaluate evidence so as to protect 
rights of women extent of corroboration needed-Notion that except in 
rarest of rare cases, the evidence of the prosecutrix cannot be accepted 
unless corroborated in material particulars erroneous. 
Indian Penal Code-Sections 376 and 342-Crime committed by 
persons in authority-Police officer-Court to give deterrent puniSh-
ment. 
c 
The respondent, a Sub-Inspector of police, was convicted under 
D 
section 376 .of I.P.C. for having committed rape on a young newly 
married girl of 19 or 20 years of age, by the Additional Sessions Judge, 
Nagpur. The respondent challenged his conviction in appeal to the High 
Court. The High Court set aside the order of conviction and sentence 
imposed by the trial court and acquitted him. The State feeling 
aggrieved came up in appeal by special leave. While allowing the appeal 
E 
setting aside the order of the High Court and restoring that of the Trial 
Court, the Court, 
HELD: A prosecutrbi ,of a sex-offence caonot be pot on par with 
an accomplice. She is in fact a vic.tim of the crime. The Evidence Act 
nowhere says that her evidence cannot be accepted unless it is cor-
F 
rohorated in material particulars. She is undoubtedly a competent wit-
ness under section 118 and her evidence must receive the same weight as 
is attached to an injured in cases of physical violence. The same degree 
of care and caution must attache in the evaluation of her evidence as in 
the case of any injured complainant or witness and no more. [123B-C] 
What is more necessary is that the Court must be alive to and 
conscious of the fact that it is dealing with the evidence oh person who 
is interested in the outcome of charge levelled by her. Having regad to 
G 
the increase in the number of sex-violation cases in the recent past, 
particularly cases of molestation and rape in custody, it is proper to 
remove the notion, if it persists, that the testimony of a woman who is a 
H 
115 
116 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1990] 1 S.C.R. 
A 
victim of sexual violence must ordinarily be corroborated in material 
particulars except in the rarest of rare cases. [123C-D; 1248-C] 
B 
Ours is a conservative society where it concerns sexual behaviour. 
Ours is not a permissive society as in some of the Western and European 
countries. Our standard of decency and morality in public life is not the 
same as in those countries. It is, however, unfortunate that respect for 
womanhood in our country is on the decline and cases of molestation 
and rape are steadily growing. An Indian Woman is now required to 
suffer indignities in different forms, from lewd remark to eve-teasing, 
from molestation to rape. Decency and morality in plublic life can be 
promoted and protected only if w1e deal strictly with those who violate 
C the social norms. The standard of proof to be expected by the Court in 
such cases must take into account the fact that such crimes are generally 
committed on the sly and very ra1·ely direct evidence of a person other 
than the prosecutrix is available. [1240-F] 
D 
E 
Courts must also realise that ordinarily a woman, more so a 
young girl, will not stake her reputation by leveling a false charge 
concerning her chastity. By our criminal laws vide powers are confer-
red on police officers investigaiin1: cognizable offences. The infrastruc-
ture of our criminal 'investigation system recognises and indeed protects 
the right of a woman to decent and dignified treatment at the hands of 
the investigating agency. [ l24F-H] 
The purpose and setting, the person and his position, the misuse 
or abuse of office and the des11air of the victim which led to her 
surrender are all relevant factors which must be present in the miud of 
the Court while evaluating the conduct-evidence of the prosecutrix. A 
person in authority, such as a police officer carries with him the awe of 
F 
office which is bound to condition the behaviour of his victim [ l25C-D] 
The Court must not be oblivious of the emotional turmoil and thl 
psychological injury that a prosecutrix suffers on being molested or 
raped. She suffers a tremendous sense of shame and the fear of being 
shunned by society and her near relatives including her husband. 
G 
Instead of treating her with compassion a

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