Delhi Minor Girl Rape Guilty Punishment Uphed SC – In 1986, a minor girl was raped, the Supreme Court retained the convict – delhi minor girl girl ranpe guilty punishment uphed Supreme Court VERDICT JURDICT JURDICT JURIME NTCPVZ

The country’s largest court on Tuesday upheld the conviction of the convict who raped a minor girl 39 years ago. The convict raped a minor girl in 1986. For this, the trial court convicted him. In this case, the victim and her family had to wait for nearly four decades to get justice, on which the Supreme Court expressed grief.

A bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Sanjay Karol accepted the appeal filed by the state of Rajasthan and rejected the July 2013 verdict of the State High Court, acquitting the person. The bench said in its judgment, “It is very sad that this minor girl and her family had to wait for about four decades for the conclusion of this horrific chapter of their lives.”

The Supreme Court expressed surprise at the way the High Court of dealing with the case and expressed displeasure at the name of the victim in his judgment. In November 1987, a trial court convicted the then 21 -year -old man and sentenced him to seven years in jail.

The bench said that the main arguments behind the acquittal by the High Court were the statements of the prosecution witnesses, including the minor victim. The bench said, ‘It is true that the child witness (victim) did not say anything about the crime against her. When asked about the incident, the trial judge recorded that ‘V’ (the victim) was silent and when asked further, he only shed tears quietly and nothing else.

The apex court further said, ‘In our view, it cannot be used as a factor in favor of the defendant (accused). The tears of ‘V’ should be understood according to their value. This silence cannot be for the benefit of the defendant. The bench said that the silence was of a baby girl and it cannot be considered equal to the silence of a fully conscious adult victim, which will again have to weigh in their circumstances.

The court said that this trauma has quietly gripped the victim and it would be unfair to put the entire prosecution on her shoulders. The bench said, “At a young age than this horrific trauma, the victim should be freed on the basis that her criminal can be put behind bars.”

The bench said that there is no stringent rule that in the absence of such statements, there cannot be conviction, especially when other evidence – medical and circumstantial – pointing to such conclusions. Citing their decisions on the child victims of sexual harassment, the bench said that the first Appellate Court, the High Court is expected to assess evidence independently before confirming or interrupting the findings of the lower court.

Therefore, the accused was ordered to surrender to the competent authority within four weeks so that if he has not already imposed the sentence given by the lower court, he could serve the sentence given by the lower court.