Introduction
The Allahabad High Court has given a landmark judgement that the absence of injuries to a victim’s private parts cannot be considered the proof that the rape or gang rape did not occur. The court stated that the victim’s testimony is sufficient evidence under Indian law to establish the offence of rape. This ruling reinforces the principle that survivors should not ne disbelieved merely because of the lack of visible injuries, this will strengthen the justice system’s approach toward sexual assault cases.
Background
The case roots from a 2015 incident which involved a 20-year-old college going wrong with women. She had gone out in the evening to buy gutka for her father when she was interrupted by 4 men, after that the men took her to an abandoned building, and forcefully compelled her to consume alcohol and physically assaulted her. The victim soon lost consciousness and upon regaining it the next morning. She realized that she had been gang-raped then se immediately informed her parents, who accompanied her to the police station. The session court convicted all four accused under Section 376-D of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced them 20 years of rigorous imprisonment. However, the convicts filed an appeal in Allahabad High Court challenging the decision of session court.
What the Court said
The concerned matter is Irfan v. State of U.P
Justice J.J Munir of the Allahabad High Court delivered a detailed judgement clarifying that the injuries to the private parts are not mandatory to establish rape. The court also stated that there are circumstances in which there can be absence of injuries which can be the victim is not resisting due to fear, the victim being rendered unconscious or semi-conscious due to intoxicants, there is a use of violent force by the perpetrators. The court by these criteria made it clear that the medical evidence alone is not conclusive and that the testimony of the prosecutrix carries significant evidentiary value. Adding on Justice J.J Munir stated that in the present case the victim was forced to consume alcohol, leaving her semi-conscious and vulnerable and non- resistance does not equate to consent
After carefully examining the evidence the Allahabad High Court held that the Conviction of Irfan@ Golu was upheld since his involvement was clearly established and the other three accused were acquitted due to lack of identification and insufficient evidence.
Conclusion
The judgment in the concerned matter is a significant milestone in Indian Criminal Law as this judgement clarifies that the physical injuries are not a prerequisite to prove rape, the Allahabad high court has strengthened the position of survivors within the justice system. The ruling highlights three critical points which are
1. Victim testimony remains the cornerstone of justice in the rape trials.
2. Absence of injuries does not disprove sexual assault.
3. Systemic issues like police reluctances must be addressed to ensure swift justice.
About the Author
Tushar Kumar is a final-year BBA-LLB student at Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University. With a strong interest in Intellectual Property Rights, he enjoys exploring how law interacts with innovation and creativity. He’s equally passionate about legal writing, Research and believes in making complex legal ideas easier to understand through clear articles. Tushar continues to deepen his understanding of the law while contributing thoughtful pieces on contemporary legal issues.