in a landmark judgement supreme court said: that the testimony of a victim did not need independent corroboration. now how this judgement will affect the fairness of a trial?

first the meaning of the word corroboration:Confirmation or support of a claim or evidence through independent, authoritative, and credible evidence.

Read more: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/corroboration.html#ixzz1u8k1LFYm

now this means the rape victims testimony did not need independant, authoritative and credible evidence according to supreme court. what does that mean? it means that the testimony will be BELIEVED to be true without evidence.

evidence is the eye of law and justice. no trial could ever be fair without evidence. after this judgement of supreme court how many rape trials would be fair?

besides this judgement of sc is also violative of art. 14 that says the nobody should be given special previlege before law. this is called equality before law.

here rape victim is granted special previlege by not allowing her to present evidence in support of her claim.

how a premier court of a nation pass such a judgement that violates both art. 14 and indian evidence act?

Mr.Banarjee, 

I don't find that upsetting for the reason :-

1. SC in Md.Imran v. State NCT of Delhi (2011) the decision which you talk about - does not mandate the lower courts TO RELY ON UNCORROBORATED TESTIMONY OF RAPE VICTIMS AND CONVICT SOLELY ON THAT BASIS, it merely empowers them to, if it otherwise inspires confidence. Courts are free to, and infact do not rely on such statements if they are not worthy of credence.

2. No judgment is to be read as Euclid's theorem, but in the light of it's peculiar facts.

3. Though it is desirable to, but it is plainly affront to common sense to expect INDEPENDANT WITNESSES IN RAPE CASES, Rapes don't happen on the streets, if a woman is overcome and raped by a man in a deserted farmouse, do you insist on independant testimony ??????? 

4. Refer to J.Krishna Iyer in Krishan Lal v. State of Haryana - 1979 - SC - would be educative for you

well  it may be sc does not mandate the lower courts but you know once the lower courts are shown green signal on the matter of testimony without evidence, it is very likely and possible that they should follow that judgement to quickly dispose of cases. this may result to injustice since evidence is the only eye of law.

in rape case two elements need to be proved according to IPC.

1] penetration

2] absense of consent

now the second element is what distinguish rape from ordinary s*xual intercourse. so absense of consent must be proved beyond reasonable doubt in order to establish rape. agree or not?

independant witness only can prove lack of consent. sometimes the sign of physical violence can prove lack of consent.if you don't consider absence of consent element and rely solely on penetration then chances are there that the woman will take advantage of such kind of practice. if a woman who wanted to take revenge on a man, seduce him to s*xual intercourse with full consent and afterwards go to police station and file a case of rape, then an innocent man may be punished.

if a woman is overcome and raped by a man in a deserted farmouse: how could you know that she is raped in a deserted farmhouse when there is lack of evidence to prove lack of consent? here you have pre-conceived notion that the woman is raped which lacks proper evidence.  if the woman has medical report showing penetration then the case may be that she has a consensual intercourse in a desrted farmhouse unless she proves lack of consent.

for the sake of justice sometimes we need to be more cautious. some people may think that we are cruel and insensitive, that does not mean we would sacrifice justice.

I would say such rulings are also against the principles of natural justice.

I live in the Garhwal region where women are beautiful and girls reach maturity very early. There are huge movements of families for marriages which offers opportunities for the young people to mingle together. It is not difficult to slip away into the surrounding jungle areas...

But when the couple is caught red-handed, the girl invariably claims that she was raped even though she went into the jungle with the boy on her own free will and probably encouraged the boy and was enjoying it as well.

The result is that the poor boy lands up in Jail while the girl gets married off to a good party.

Where is any justice in all this ?

I think our courts should wake up to the fact that they are slowly losing credibility and it won't be long before the Maoists take over the entire country if speedy and effective justice is not given.

Vishwa

right viswa. the garwal culture is frightening.  it would be dangerous to date  a girl.  and sc is saying that girl's testimony does not require evidence to support.  then how there will be the natural justice at all.

our last resort is judiciary in any matter. i think that by providing an evidence-free trial to a rape victim, sc is going to demolish our last chance for a justice.

shame, shame india. no justice. no peace.

Recently one girl, after staying with a boy, in live-in kind of relatioship for 8 years, filed the rape case against the boy !! Wow !!

The supreme court also denied bail to him, her theory is that he promised to marry her, but married some other girl..

With due respect to honorable Supreme Court, I beg to differ with the logic of honorabel Supreme Court !! How can Supreme Court even think that girls are intellectually so stupid, is THAT the only thing they did in eight years, in all likely hood that girl would have used that boy financially, and the boy never forced her, she was never under any threat or coercion. For 8 years she could not have been fooled. she must have also enjoyed. It is the bl**dy understanding gone sour, thats all !! Many a times a very purpose of live in relatioship is to assess the compatibility, so the marriage may not happen, it does not mean that the girl goes to police and shouts rape rape !! Even divorce takes place in 8 years, the girl cannot say that while performing Marriage, the boy promised for life long staying together. Utter NONSENSE.

i totally agree with you Mr. trivedi.  it the understanding gone wrong. sc  still thinks that women are stupid, weak, helpless and men are strong, intelligent etc.etc.

india has no hope of civilisation.