Cannot expect 6-year-old rape survivor to remember full name of accused; Bombay High Court upholds conviction of rapist

The Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court, while recently upholding conviction of a man for raping a minor, emphasized that a 6-year-old rape survivor cannot be expected to remember the full names of persons [Satish Nandre v. State of Maharashtra & Anr.].A division bench of Justices Vibha Kankanwadi and YG Khobragade made the observation while rejecting the argument of the rape accused that because the 6-year-old survivor could not remember his full name, the police or her parents must have tutored her to falsely implicate him.“It cannot be expected from a girl of six years that she would tell the full name of the other person, who is residing in the nearby area. She would know that person with the first or last name or may identify that person by the name of the person's child. Giving full name of the accused by victim's mother from victim's nickname therefore cannot be viewed from an angle of implication of the accused. Important point to be noted is that it is absolutely not suggested to her as to what was the reason for alleged implication of the accused,” the Court said. .The Court was considering the appeal moved by the man who was convicted in 2015 by a sessions judge for raping the minor girl in September 2012. The sessions judge had sentenced him to 15 years rigorous imprisonment under Section 376(2)(f) (rape on woman below 12 years of age) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and provisions of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. .One of the grounds raised by the accused in his appeal was that the police had tutored the girl to take his nickname. Even assuming the argument to be true, there was no reason given by the accused as to why the police would hold a grudge against the accused, the bench said.“What was that reason for the police to implicate him in such a crime. If that reason is not coming forward, it cannot be appreciated that the police would have told the name of the accused to the girl and told her that she should take the name of the accused,” the court held. .After re-assessing the evidence, the bench concurred with the sessions judge's finding that the minor survivor, a member of the scheduled tribe community, was raped by the accused, from a higher-up community with the full knowledge of the caste of the girl.“The appreciation of the evidence by trial judge, so also the conclusion that has been drawn that the accused is convicted for the offence punishable under Indian Penal Code and Atrocities Act, was proper,” the Court held. .Therefore, it upheld the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court on the appellant accused..The appellant was represented by advocate PP Dawalkar and the minor victim by advocate Renuka B Ghule who was appointed by through Legal Aid. Additional Public Prosecutor VS Choudhary appeared for the State..[Read Judgment]