Testimony of Mentally Retarded Prosecutrix Coupled with Corroborated Medical Evidence Overrides Delay in Filing FIR

The Appellant, a temple priest, was accused of raping the prosecutrix, a 30-year-old woman with mild mental retardation (IQ of 60), inside a temple residential room on February 4, 2010.

The victim disclosed the incident to her mother, who initially did not report it after the Appellant apologized and promised to leave the city.

The matter was brought to the police 40 days later, on March 14, 2010, after the victim's brother spotted the Appellant back in the vicinity, leading to an altercation.

The Appellant challenged the Trial Court's conviction dated January 30, 2013, citing the delay in FIR, lack of forensic corroboration, and the improbability of the incident.

1. Whether an inordinate delay of 40 days in registering the FIR is fatal to the prosecution's case.

2. Whether the sole testimony of a mentally retarded prosecutrix is credible and sufficient for conviction in the absence of forensic corroboration.

3. Whether the alleged incident was highly improbable given the public nature of the temple and the presence of others.

The Court relied on the principle that delay in lodging an FIR is not fatal if satisfactorily explained, especially in cases involving social stigma or fear.

It applied the standard that a conviction can be based on the sole testimony of a prosecutrix if it is of "sterling quality".

The Court relied on Edakkandi Dineshan v. State of Kerala (2025), C. Muniappan v. State of T.N. (2010), and Dayal Singh v. State of Uttaranchal (2012), which collectively establish that defective investigation or lack of forensic evidence does not entitle an accused to acquittal if the ocular evidence is reliable.

The court also noted Section 428 of the Cr.P.C. regarding the set-off of the sentence.

The Court found the 40-day delay reasonable, attributing it to the family’s desire to avoid social ostracization and their initial reliance on the Appellant's promise to leave.

While forensic evidence (semen on a 40-day-old bedsheet) was deemed unreliable, the Court held that the MLC's finding of a "healed hymen tear" corroborated the timing of the incident.

The Court underscored that the prosecutrix’s mild mental retardation made her "gullible and not manipulative," enhancing the credibility of her detailed account of the room’s layout and the assault.

The argument regarding the "public" nature of the temple was dismissed by noting that the assault occurred during the afternoon when temples are typically quiet.

The Court concluded that any minor contradictions in the testimony were due to the victim's cognitive limitations and the lapse of time, rather than falsehood.

The Court upheld the Trial Court’s judgment dated January 30, 2013, and the order on sentence dated January 31, 2013, dismissed the appeal, and ordered the Appellant to surrender immediately with the benefit of set-off under Section 428 Cr.P.C.