Material Contradictions in Victim’s Testimony Regarding Place of Occurrence and Medical Inconsistency Entitle Accused to Benefit of Doubt

The victim (aged 14–17) filed a complaint on February 11, 2018, alleging the appellant raped her six times starting in October 2017

The first incident allegedly occurred at a laundry factory where both parties (and the victim’s parents) worked

On February 10, 2018, the victim was diagnosed as pregnant after complaining of abdominal pain

The Trial Court convicted the appellant under Section 376(2)(n) of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, sentencing him to 20 years’ imprisonment and a fine of ₹2,00,000/-

1. Whether the uncorroborated testimony of the victim was of "sterling quality" sufficient to sustain a conviction despite material contradictions

2. Whether the prosecution established the site of the occurrence and the timeline of the offense beyond reasonable doubt given the medical evidence regarding the victim's pregnancy

Section 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of the POCSO Act

The Court relied on the judicial principle that while a conviction for sexual assault can be based on the sole testimony of a victim, such evidence must be of "sterling quality," exceptionally credible, and consistent from inception to oral testimony

Nirmal Premkumar & Anr. v. State Rep. By Inspector Of Police (2024 INSC 193)

The Court found the victim’s testimony failed the "sterling quality" test due to three major discrepancies. First, there was a fundamental contradiction regarding the locus delicti: in her FIR and deposition, she stated the rape occurred at the laundry factory, but in her Section 164 CrPC statement, she claimed it occurred at her home while she was cooking

Second, a chronological impossibility existed: the victim claimed to be 8 months pregnant during her April 2018 deposition (suggesting August/September 2017 conception), whereas she alleged the first assault by the appellant occurred after Durga Puja (October 2017)

Third, the Court noted the victim's failure to disclose the alleged assault to family members despite living with them, and the absence of DNA evidence matching the appellant to the fetus

These factors collectively created a reasonable doubt that the victim may have had physical intimacy with others prior to the alleged incidents with the appellant

The High Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence. The appellant was granted the benefit of doubt and ordered to be set at liberty forthwith, subject to a bond under Section 437A CrPC (corresponding to Section 481 of the BNSS, 2023)