The Supreme Court has ruled that in cases under Section 376 IPC, a rape victim’s credible and trustworthy testimony will prevail over the absence or insufficiency of medical evidence, provided her story is found to be creditworthy.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of an individual in a POCSO case, affirming that in incidents involving offenses under Section 376 of the IPC, if the victim’s account is deemed credible, her testimony will take precedence over any perceived lack of medical evidence.
This ruling came during an appeal against the Chhattisgarh High Court’s decision, which had convicted the accused under Sections 376 (2), 450 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
The Division Bench, consisting of Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice N.V. Anjaria, stated,
“In cases of offences committed under Section 376, IPC, when the story of the victim girl as told in the evidence is found credit-worthy, the apparent insufficiency of medical evidence pitted against acceptable testimony of the victim, the latter would prevail.”
The case involved a 15-year-old girl who was alone at home when the accused entered, sending her brother to fetch a pack of chewing tobacco. The accused then forced the victim to lie on a cot in the porch, gagged her, and raped her.
Upon seeing her brother, the accused fled, threatening the victim to keep silent. The victim later recounted the incident to her parents, leading to a police complaint and the registration of an FIR.
She underwent a medical examination, and her statement was recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1978, resulting in a criminal case against the accused that concluded with his conviction.
The Bench observed that the victim’s testimony was clear, consistent, and natural. The sequence of events was corroborated by other witnesses. The testimony of the victim and her brother aligned regarding the circumstances of the offense.
The Bench remarked,
“An attentive look at the evidence of the prosecutrix (PW-2) would reveal that her testimony in narrating the incident and to describe what happened with her, is natural. Even when read independently, excepting the oral testimonies of others highlighted above, it inspires confidence and veracity for its clarity and consistency. The contention that non-availability of emphatic medical evidence about occurrence of physical intercourse and absence of external injury marks make it imperative to doubt and disregard the evidence of the prosecutrix, could hardly be countenanced,”
The medical officer’s evidence indicated no external injuries on the victim’s genitals. However, the Bench reiterated that corroboration with medical evidence is not essential when credible testimony from the victim is available. They referenced the case of Lok Mal alias Loku vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2025).
The Bench emphasized,
“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.”
Furthermore, the Bench found no significant discrepancies between the testimonies of the two witnesses, noting that minor inconsistencies that do not undermine the core of the evidence should be disregarded.
The Bench concluded,
“The crux of the incident, of accused overpowering the victim and committing forcible act by forcing her to the bed, could be clearly established from the totality of evidence adduced by the prosecution. 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.”
Consequently, the Bench upheld the High Court’s ruling and dismissed the appeal.
Case Title: Deepak Kumar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 929)
Read Attachment