KOCHI: A vague statement by a woman alleging that a man “hugged and impregnated” her is not enough to convict him for rape, said the high court. The woman’s testimony should state about penetrative, nonconsensual sexual act is required, the court said.
Justice Kauser Edappagath was considering an appeal in a 2009 case in which a man was accused of raping a woman and impregnating her on the false promise of marriage.
In the judgment, the high court said even though the woman’s testimony has great weight, even in the absence of corroboration, the prosecution has to prove penetration as it is an essential ingredient of the offence of rape. There must be proof of actual penetration or at least penile accessing, the court said.
The vague statement of the woman that “the accused hugged and impregnated me” without indication about penetration is not sufficient to attract rape, the court said. Unless the woman states in her evidence about penetrative, nonconsensual sexual act by the accused on her, the offence of rape cannot be said to be made out, the court held while setting aside the conviction.
(The victim's identity has not been revealed to protect her privacy as per Supreme court directives on cases related to sexual assault)
