Kolkata, April 19 -- The Calcutta High Court has upheld the conviction of a man for rape in a 2001 case from West Midnapore, holding that a survivor's testimony can be sufficient even amid serious lapses in investigation.

The bench of Justice Chaitali Chatterjee Das observed that the survivor is entitled to compensation under Section 357A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, even though the provision was introduced after the incident. It directed the State Legal Services Authority to take steps to extend the benefit, noting that the law applies irrespective of when the offence occurred.

The accused was sentenced to seven years' rigorous imprisonment by the trial court.

The case arose from an incident in a village under Binpur police station limits, where a young girl alleged that she was gagged, taken to the accused's house at night and sexually assaulted. Her family later traced her to the accused's house, though witness accounts differed on how she was rescued and who was present at the scene.

During the appeal, the defence pointed to multiple inconsistencies, including a delay of over 20 days in lodging the complaint, contradictions among witnesses, absence of seizure lists and forensic evidence, and non-examination of the investigating officer. Medical evidence also did not support forcible intercourse, with no injuries found and the report was prepared on plain paper without standard certification.

The court noted these deficiencies and described inconsistencies in the prosecution's version, including conflicting accounts by the victim's parents.

It also recorded that a separate kidnapping case had been lodged against the victim's family members in connection with the incident.

Despite this, the court held that the core allegation of forcible sexual assault remained consistent in the survivor's testimony. Reiterating that the evidence of a rape survivor can, by itself, sustain a conviction if it inspires confidence, the court found no reason to interfere with the conviction.

On the delay in filing the complaint, the court accepted the explanation that the family had initially approached the police but no case

was registered.

Published by HT Digital Content Services with permission from Millennium Post.