The Delhi High Court has upheld a trial court’s order handing jail term to two men for gang raping a Nigerian woman in 2014, however, it commuted the sentence to 20 years from 30.
A division bench Justices Mukta Gupta and Poonam A Bamba was hearing an appeal by convicts, Raj Kumar and Dinesh, challenging the trial court's decision to convict and sentence them to 30 years in jail.
The court said that the absence of semen traces in the DNA analysis does not invalidate the victim’s claim, as penetration alone is sufficient to establish the offense of rape.
The bench reduced the initial 30-year jail term for the two men, considering factors such as one of them being unmarried and the other having responsibilities to care for their children and parents and acknowledged the possibility of their reform.
The incident occurred on the night of June 18-19, 2014, when the Nigerian woman was returning from a friend’s party and while she was searching for an auto-rickshaw, a car stopped nearby, and the two accused forcibly took her into the vehicle.
They then took her to a house and raped her. Afterward, they put her back into the car and abandoned her near a metro pillar, having also stolen her bag containing valuables.
The woman subsequently went to a police station and filed a complaint. Based on her description of the house, the two men were arrested.
The court said: “Considering the evidence on record and that the version of the prosecutrix is not only wholly reliable but is also supported by other facts and circumstances, lending a further assurance to her version, this court finds no error in the impugned judgment of conviction.”
During the appeal, the convicts’ counsel claimed that it was a case of mistaken identity and that they were wrongfully convicted and argued the lack of corroboration from the DNA analysis report regarding her claim of being raped by the two men.
To this, the bench stated that the absence of semen traces does not falsify the victim’s assertion of being raped by the two men.
The court stated that for the offense of rape, proving penetration is sufficient.
Disposing of the convicts’ appeal, the court upheld trial court’s judgment and noted that from the woman’s deposition, it was clear that she was kidnapped by them around 11 pm while she was searching for an auto-rickshaw.
The court further noted that due to the suddenness of the kidnapping, she was unable to note the car number or identify the car and that it would have been difficult for her, as a non-resident, to identify the roads.
According to the victim, her head was also kept bowed down in the car to prevent anyone from seeing her, further complicating her ability to provide details.
© 2024 IANS. All rights reserved.