Holding a juvenile guilty on charges of rape and kidnapping, a fast track court in Panipat observed that “parrot-like statement can never be considered true one” and the contradictions in statements are “humanly possible due to passage of time”.
Rejecting the defence counsel’s contention that there were “material discrepancies in the testimony of the victim and her father”, Additional Sessions Judge Sukhpreet Singh ruled that there were only “simple and minor variances in the testimony of the victim and her father which do not go to the root of the case”.
“It is very much clear that minor contradictions are likely to occur due to human tendency. If a person is deposing in a parrot-like manner, the deposition may be considered as false one,” observed Justice Singh in the 27-page judgment.
He said it was held in a Supreme Court case that “minor contradictions are likely to occur and rather strengthen the case of the prosecution as truthful witness will not make parrot-like statements”.
The case pertained to the kidnapping and rape of a minor by a juvenile in 2018. The juvenile was, however, tried as an adult as per Section 18(3) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
DNA report
The court also relied on the DNA report which indicated that the seminal stains on the cotton wool swab of the victim matched with the child-in-conflict with the law.
The defence counsel had contended that no independent witness was joined or examined by the prosecution and there was no evidence on file to connect the child-in-conflict with the law with the commission of the alleged offences.
The judge, however, observed that the overall evidence did not make the present case logically improbable. “Evidence of sole victim of sexual assault is enough for conviction, it does not require any corroboration unless there are compelling reasons for seeking corroboration,” he said.
“The convict was sentenced to 10 years’, five years’ and three years’ imprisonment for offences under the Indian Penal Code and another 10 years’ imprisonment for the offence under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, besides a fine of ₹65,000,” said Panipat District Attorney Rajesh Chaudhary.
