The Punjab and Haryana high court in its recent order stated that the testimony of a prosecutrix in a case of crime against women does not require any corroboration and is sufficient to proceed against an accused. The trial court is not required to look for any other supportive or new material at the time of framing of charges, the court added.
Case:
According to allegations levelled by one woman, Balkar Singh of Mansa had a property dispute with her. The woman alleged that, on spotting her working in the courtyard of her house on October 25, 2016, Balkar allegedly stopped his tractor and co-accused Bhola Singh instigated him to disgrace her.
Upon this, both allegedly entered her house, and Balkar Singh molested her and tried to drag her inside. When she resisted his attempts, he assaulted her and inflicted injuries on her, it was alleged, following which an FIR was registered for outraging woman’s modesty, house trespass and voluntarily causing hurt.
The woman had named Balkar consistently, and categorically deposed regarding his role. However, police filed the chargesheet only against the co-accused, Bhola Singh. The police probe had concluded that Balkar was not in the village at the time of the incident on the basis of the tower location of his mobile phone.
Trial Court
The trial court framed charges against the co-accused, but on the basis of the woman’s plea, the reversional court ordered Balkar’s summoning as an additional accused. He had challenged this order before the high court, claiming that order passed by the reversional court is not sustainable as it ignored that the investigation found him innocent.
Punjab & Haryana High Court
The high court bench of Justice Suvir Sehgal was dealing with this plea from Balkar. Citing orders from the top court, the high court said what trial court has to examine at the time of framing of charges is whether prime facie case is made out for framing of charge. It further said that the material on record has to be examined in this background. Since, the woman has consistently and categorically deposed regarding Balkar’s role, he ought to be summoned, said the high court.
Adding that her testimony does not require any corroboration and is sufficient to proceed against the accused, the high court remarked,
The evidence of the prosecutrix has been placed on a much higher pedestal than that of an injured witness by the Supreme Court.
Dismissing Balkar’s plea, it directed the trial court to frame fresh charges and conduct the trial again.
ALSO READ –
“Staying Together For Two Days Is Also Considered Live-In Relationship”: Punjab Haryana High Court
“Section 498A Is A Weapon Rather Than Shield For Disgruntled Wives” – Punjab Haryana High Court
“Court Cannot Ignore The Number Of Times False Cases Are Registered” – Punjab Haryana High Court
READ ORDER | Recording Wife’s Telephonic Conversation To Prove Her Cruelty Is Infringement Of Woman’s Privacy: Punjab & Haryana High Court
Wife Eligible For Family Pension Even If She Is Convicted For Murder | Punjab & Haryana High Court
ALSO WATCH –
Noida Uber Driver Records Lady Passenger Giving Him Threats Of False Molestation Case
Join our Facebook Group or follow us on social media by clicking on the icons below
Join our Facebook Group or follow us on social media by clicking on the icons below
If you find value in our work, you may choose to donate to Voice For Men Foundation via Milaap OR via UPI: voiceformenindia@hdfcbank (80G tax exemption applicable)
Follow Us
