Meghalaya High Court Upholds Conviction Of Boy Who Sexually Assaulted Minor Girlfriend After Making Her Unconscious
Recently, the Meghalaya High Court affirmed the conviction of a boy who committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault on his girlfriend by way of intoxicating her temporarily to fulfil his sexual desire/lust. The accused and the minor victim girl were in a romantic relationship, however after the refusal of the minor to build a sexual relationship with him, the accused committed...
Recently, the Meghalaya High Court affirmed the conviction of a boy who committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault on his girlfriend by way of intoxicating her temporarily to fulfil his sexual desire/lust.
The accused and the minor victim girl were in a romantic relationship, however after the refusal of the minor to build a sexual relationship with him, the accused committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault on the girl by administering a sedate drug in the tea.
The Accused pleaded that the sentence of 20 years under Section 376(2) of IPC could be reduced to 10 years as the sexual relationship was built on a love affair with the victim's consent.
After finding that the medical report duly corroborates the victim's testimony, the bench comprising Chief Justice S. Vaidyanathan and Justice W. Diengdoh refused to interfere with the punishment imposed on the Accused.
The Court said that “though there was a love affair between the accused and the victim girl, owing to the victim girl's repeated refusal to have sexual intercourse, the accused had mixed some intoxicated element in the tea and made her asleep with part consciousness and thereafter, he had committed the offence of aggravated sexual assault on the victim girl, which is highly condemnable, amounting to betrayal of the girl.”
Also, the court rejected the argument of delay in registration of FIR against the accused. Upon placing reliance on the Supreme Court's decision in State of Himachal Pradesh v. Prem Singh reported in AIR 2009 SC 1010, the Judgment authored by the Chief Justice observed that delay in lodging of FIR would not be a valid ground to throw the prosecution's case as the case relating to a minor girl must be handled with utmost care. There is no hard and fast rule in the registration of FIR in a time-framed manner.
Given the aforesaid observations, the Court dismissed the appeal.
Counsels for Appellant(s) Mr. K.Ch. Gautam, Adv with Ms. G.C. Marboh, Adv
Counsels for Respondent(s) Mr. N.D. Chullai, AAG with Ms. R. Colney, GA
Case Details: Shri Mihkahtngen Sarubai Versus State of Meghalaya & Anr.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Megh) 22
Click here to Read/Download the Judgment