- Home
- /
- High Courts
- /
- Kerala High Court
- /
- Merely Because 16-Yr-Old Sexual...
Merely Because 16-Yr-Old Sexual Abuse Survivor Smokes Not Ground To Say He Is Of Deviant Character: Kerala HC Upholds Conviction U/S 377 IPC
Tellmy Jolly
22 Jan 2025 7:16 AM
The Kerala High Court while dismissing the appeals of two men who were convicted and sentenced to three year imprisonment for committing an offence under Section 377 of IPC for sexually abusing a minor boy, observed that the victim's testimony cannot be termed as deviant or unreliable merely because he smoked. The allegation against the accused men was that they took a 16-year-old boy in...
The Kerala High Court while dismissing the appeals of two men who were convicted and sentenced to three year imprisonment for committing an offence under Section 377 of IPC for sexually abusing a minor boy, observed that the victim's testimony cannot be termed as deviant or unreliable merely because he smoked.
The allegation against the accused men was that they took a 16-year-old boy in their car to a desolate place, forcibly made him drink alcohol and committed carnal intercourse against the order of nature. The accused had claimed that the minor boy was of "deviant character" and that his testimony was not reliable or safe.
Justice C S Sudha dismissed the men's appeals on finding that there is no reason to disbelieve the boy and only because the boy had admitted that he used to smoke, would not be a ground to conclude that he is of a deviant character. The court said:
“PW5 admitted that he used to smoke but not drink. Merely because PW5 admitted that he used to smoke, would not be a ground to conclude that he is of a deviant character. Youngsters are prone to commit mistakes/follies during their teens or young age for which they cannot be branded as deviant and wholly unreliable.”
The accused argued that evidence was unsatisfactory to establish case beyond reasonable doubt. It was argued that the only evidence was the testimony of the boy which was not of sterling quality and that they should not have been convicted only on its basis. It was argued that testimony of boy was inconsistent as he had consumed alcohol and benefit of doubt ought to have been granted.
The Court on examining the testimony of the victim boy stated that there was no reason to believe his version. The Court rejected the argument that the boy was trying to save himself from his parents for having consumed alcohol on the alleged day of incident.
The Court further stated that there was no reason to believe the boy who has clearly deposed regarding the overt acts of the accused. It further stated that the doctor who examined the boy also deposed that there was discolouration on his buttocks. Court added, “It is highly improbable and unlikely for PW5 to have fabricated such a false story against the accused persons especially when he has no motive or reason(s) to do so. No evidence or materials have been brought on record to show that the accused had any prior acquaintance with PW5 and that due to some enmity, a false allegation has been raised.”
As such, the appeals were dismissed.
Case Number: Crl.A No. 64 Of 2014 & Connected Matter
Case Title: Abdul Salam v State Of Kerala & Connected Matter
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 43