Jahanvi Agarwal
Recently in Arjun Das V. State of Meghalaya, the Meghalaya High Court held that lack of witnesses will not be considered as a ground in sexual assault to release the accused. A bench of Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice W Deingdoh, held that:
“The law that has developed requires the allegation of the survivor to be taken seriously and, if found to be credible, to accept the same … When the survivor is a child, it is difficult to imagine that a story would be conjured up out of nothing and the same would be consistently repeated. Thus, when the survivor is a child of, say, up to 11-12 years of age, unless the court finds the child to be precocious enough to make out a story and consistently repeat the same, the fact that there may not have been any witness to the incident of sexual assault may not, by itself, let the accused off the hook.”
The Court observed and dismissed the appeal where the accused was a tuition instructor, who had been convicted of serious penetrative sexual assault on one of his students who was nine years old.
During the investigation, a medical check revealed lacerations and rips in the survivor’s anus. The petitioner contended that his brother and another student who was taking tuition at the time were not called to testify during the trial.
The High Court ruled that the case was “open and shut” because of the survivor’s unambiguous and credible statement, medical evidence, and lack of flaws in the trial court decision and processes.
The Bench declared that summoning witnesses for questioning during the trial was not hindered in any way.
“In the absence of the appellant calling such persons as defence witnesses despite having due opportunity therefore, the appellant cannot surmise as to what such persons may have stated to detract from the consistent version of the survivor.”
As a result, the appeal was dismissed.
Case Name: Arjun Das V. State of Meghalaya
Diary Number: 2/2023
Bench: Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice W Deingdoh