Sikkim HC upholds conviction of man for repeatedly raping his grandmother

Reading time: 07 minutes

Summary

The Sikkim High Court has upheld the conviction of a 24-year-old man who was found guilty of raping his 80-year-old maternal grandmother.

The panel of judges, consisting of Judge Meenakshi Madan Rai and Judge Bhaskar Raj Pradhanupheld the judgment of the Fast Track Sessions Court, citing solid evidence and a thorough trial.

The appellant/accused was convicted under Sections 376(2)(f) (rape of relative, guardian, etc.), 376(2)(n) (repeated rape of the same woman) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code. The heinous crime took place when the victim was living with her daughter, son-in-law and son, the appellant.

The incident came to light when the victim’s daughter returned from a trip to West Bengal and found her mother missing. The elderly woman was eventually found at a neighbor’s house, where she disclosed the assault. She reported that her grandson had raped her multiple times and threatened her with further violence if she disclosed the abuse.

In her First Information Report (FIR), the victim described in detail how the accused stalked her and touched her inappropriately, often while drunk. She also mentioned his previous imprisonment and the threats he made to silence her. During the trial, the victim repeatedly repeated her allegations and the medical examination report substantiated her claims of sexual assault.

In contrast, the defence argued that the age of the victim was misrepresented, the delay in filing the FIR was inexplicable and the victim’s immediate neighbour, who could have been a key witness, was not called to testify. It was also pointed out that the victim’s clothes were not seized and she had no physical injuries. The accused also suggested a psychiatric examination of the accused, citing his history of alcohol abuse and violence.

The court also addressed the delay in filing the FIR and acknowledged that the victim’s reluctance to report the crime was understandable given the family relationship. The Supreme Court has previously stressed that delays in reporting rape cases do not necessarily undermine the prosecution’s case, especially in sensitive situations involving close family members. The court observed that “She was too ashamed and did not tell anyone about the incident, which is completely understandable under the circumstances.”

The Court noted the finding of the court of first instance that “In this case, besides the victim, the grandmother of the accused, even the mother of the accused herself has come forward to report the matter against her own son. It is, therefore, evident that it was under the sheer duress of being repeatedly raped by her accused grandson that PW-2 mustered the courage to finally approach the police.”

“The court saw no reason not to believe the victim, an elderly woman, since at her age it was unlikely that she would make such allegations against her own grandchild unless she had no other choice.” the Supreme Court said.

Specifically, the court had sentenced the accused to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs 10,000 for each conviction of rape, along with a two-year imprisonment and a fine of Rs 1,000 for criminal intimidation. The sentences were to be served concurrently.

The Supreme Court acknowledged the thoroughness of the proceedings of the Court of First Instance and upheld the appellant’s conviction, affirming the seriousness of the crime and the credibility of the victim’s testimony. Finally, the appeal was dismissed.

Title of Case: XX vs. State of Sikkim (Crl. A. No. 07 of 2023)