Mere Absence Of External Injuries Not Sufficient To Discredit Victim's Credible Testimony In Rape Case : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of a man for sexually assaulting a 15-year-old girl, reiterating that a victim's testimony, if credible, is sufficient for conviction, even in the absence of corroborative medical evidence.

“It is an opt-reiterated dictum of law that in cases of rape, the testimony of the prosecutrix alone may be sufficient and sole evidence of the victim, when cogent and consistent, could be properly used to arrive at a finding of the guilt.”, the court said.

“Merely because the medical evidence was less corroborative and less supportive or absent in details or indictive of no external injuries, it in no way weakened the prosecution case. Sole testimony of the victim was a strong evidence to rely on along with available attendant evidence.”, the court added.

The bench comprising Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and NV Anjaria upheld the Chhattisgarh High Court's verdict. The Appellant was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 [POCSO Act] and further came to be convicted for the offence under Section 376 (2), IPC to be sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and with a fine of ₹1,000/-.

The Appellant assailed his conviction on the ground of non-availability of emphatic medical evidence about the occurrence of physical intercourse and absence of external injury marks. However, the prosecution stated that the victim's testimony was consistent throughout the trial, making the absence of medical evidence a less relevant fact for sustaining the conviction.

Finding force in the prosecution's case, the judgment authored by Justice Anjaria stated that the Evidence Act doesn't state anywhere that evidence of the rape victim alone would not be sufficient for conviction unless corroborated. The Court said that the conviction can be sustained even if the uncorroborated testimony of the victim remained consistent and credible.

Further, the Court rejected the Appellant's argument about the absence of cogent medical evidence about a rape committed on the victim. Appellant tried to portray that the medical evidence showed no injury marks on the private parts of the victim; however, the Court, relying on Wahid Khan vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2010) 2 SCC 9, repelled his contention, stating that even the slightest penetration is sufficient to make out an offence of rape.

“Evaluating the total evidence in light of the principles of law, evidentiary appreciation and application, with the evidence of the victim at the forefront, it has to be stated that victim's evidence was entirely probable, natural and trustworthy who with lucidity narrated the whole incident about commission of offence against  her by the accused. There exists no reason, much less compelling reasons, to disbelieve and discard her testimony. Her brother Mayank's testimony as a child witness was rationally and logically supportive of what the prosecutrix narrated. The factum that the cot was in the porch and the victim was forced to lay there by the accused could also be called out from the evidence.”, the court said.

“The High Court was wholly justified in upholding and confirming the conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant convict, by the trial court.”, the court added.

Cause Title: DEEPAK KUMAR SAHU VERSUS STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 776

Click here to read/download the judgment

Mr. Manish Kumar Saran, AOR Ms. Ananya Tyagi, Adv. Mr. Sidhant Sharma, Adv. appeared for Petitioner(s)

None for Respondent(s)