Testimony of a deaf-mute victim through signs constitutes admissible substantive evidence for sustaining conviction.

The victim, a woman hearing and speech impaired since birth, was alone at home on July 29, 2020, while her parents worked as agricultural laborers

The appellant, a relative, allegedly entered the house and forcibly raped her

Upon the mother’s return, the victim communicated the assault and identified the appellant through gestures

A written report was lodged, leading to charges under Sections 450 and 376(2)(j)(l) of the IPC

The Trial Court convicted the appellant, sentencing him to five years RI for house-trespass and life imprisonment until natural death for rape

The appellant challenged the conviction, citing inconsistencies in the victim’s testimony and a lack of medical injuries

1. Whether the sole testimony of a deaf and mute victim, recorded through an interpreter and gestures, is reliable and sufficient to form the basis of a conviction

2. Whether the prosecution established the charges of house-trespass (Section 450 IPC) and sexual assault (Section 376 IPC) beyond reasonable doubt

Section 119 of the Indian Evidence Act, which stipulates that a witness who is unable to speak may give evidence in any manner that makes it intelligible, such as by signs or writing, and such evidence is deemed oral evidence

State of Rajasthan v. Darshan Singh (2012) 5 SCC 789, establishing that a deaf-mute person is a competent witness if they possess the requisite intelligence and understand the nature of an oath

The "sterling witness" doctrine from Rai Sandeep @ Deenu v. State of NCT of Delhi (2012) 8 SCC 21, asserting that high-quality, unassailable testimony can sustain a conviction without corroboration

Meesala Ramakrishan v. State of A.P. (1994) 4 SCC 182 regarding the admissibility of signs and gestures

The Court found the victim’s testimony natural, consistent, and trustworthy

It noted that the Trial Court followed due procedure by utilizing a trained interpreter and demonstrative methods (a plastic doll) to ensure the victim understood the questions

The victim’s prompt disclosure to her mother (PW-1) and consistent identification of the appellant were deemed crucial circumstances

Regarding the absence of physical injuries, the Court held that medical evidence (PW-6) and the FSL report (Ex. P-26)—which detected human sperm on the victim’s vaginal slides and the appellant’s underwear—sufficiently corroborated the act of intercourse

The charge of house-trespass was sustained by the site map (Ex. P-08) and testimony confirming the appellant entered the dwelling without authority while the victim was alone

The appellant failed to provide a plausible explanation for the forensic findings or substantiate his alibi

It held that the testimony of a deaf-mute victim is substantive evidence when recorded with proper safeguards and that the prosecution successfully proved the appellant’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt through a combination of consistent testimony and scientific forensic corroboration

The appellant was ordered to serve the remainder of his life sentence