Thiruvananthapuram
(Kerala), Oct 22: In a landmark decision the High Court of Kerala has ruled
that a woman or girl habituated to sexual intercourse can't be the reason for absolving
an accused of rape particularly when a father is involved in this heinous crime
that resulted in her pregnancy. The court also convicted the accused father who
raped his daughter repeatedly for 12 years.
The court said that a
father who is expected to be the “fortress and refuge” of his daughter, has
turned beast repeatedly raping his daughter which also resulted in her becoming
pregnant. The court said that when a father rapes his daughter, it was worse
than a gamekeeper becoming a poacher or a treasury guard becoming a robber.
Justice R Narayana
Pisharadi made the observation after the victim’s father claimed that he was being
falsely implicated in the case as his daughter has admitted that she had sexual
relations with another person. The high court outrightly rejected his
contention on the ground that DNA analysis of the baby, born in May 2013 as a
result of the sexual assault, reveals that the victim’s father was the
biological father of the infant also.
“Even in a case where
it is shown that the victim is a girl of easy virtue or a girl habituated to
sexual intercourse, it may not be a ground to absolve the accused from the
charge of rape. Even assuming that the victim is previously accustomed to
sexual intercourse, that is not a decisive question. On the contrary, the
question which is required to be adjudicated is, did the accused commit rape on
the victim on the occasion complained of. It is the accused who is on trial and
not the victim, "the judge emphasized. The father “was duty-bound to
provide the victim girl protection and support. But, he perpetrated sexual
assault and rape on her. One cannot even imagine the trauma the victim would
have suffered. The indelible imprint which the incestuous act has left in her
mind cannot be ignored. She may feel the mental agony and pain for years to
come", the court added.
The judge also ruled
that there can never be a graver and heinous crime than the father
committing rape on his own daughter. The protector then becomes the predator. In
this case, the high court also noted that due to the rape committed by her
father, the victim delivered a male child and therefore, the sufferings endured
by her “would be beyond imagination”. “In such circumstances, the accused is
not entitled to any leniency in the matter of punishment,” he noted.
While convicting the
man for rape and sentencing him to 12 years in jail, the court set aside the
trial court’s decision to sentence him to 14 years imprisonment under the
Protection of Children from Sexual Offence (POCSO) Act on the ground that the
prosecution was unable to prove the victim was a minor when the rapes occurred
between June 2012-January 2013.
It also set aside the man’s conviction and sentence for criminal intimidation of the victim, saying the prosecution has not proved that she was being threatened with dire consequences by her father.