“Private injury markings are not necessary …”: Historical verdict against the tuition teacher 40 years from rape

Last update:March 10, 2025, 13:13 Ist

A 40 -year -old legal struggle for a case of sexual aggression in 1984 ended with the Supreme Court that maintained the conviction of a schooling teacher, rejecting the defense arguments.

SC supports the conviction in a case of a 40-year-old rape.

A case of sexual aggression, which took place almost four decades ago, came to a conclusion after a difficult legal struggle that stretches over 40 years. The incident took place in March 1984, when a schooling teacher assaulted the student. Despite the court by sentenced the accused within two years, the case has avoided in the higher courts for decades. The accused used an apparently minor argument to delay the verdict, eventually prolonging the victim’s suffering and the judicial process.

The court pronounced the judgment in 1986, sentenced the teacher to prison, but needed another 25 years for the High Court Allahabad to comply with the decision, followed by another 15 years for the Supreme Court to give a final verdict. Now, after 40 amazing years, the Supreme Court issued a landmark decision, providing clarity on rape convictions.

The argument of defense, according to which the absence of visible injury to the victim’s private parties meant that the act cannot be considered rape, was rejected by the Supreme Court. The accused also claimed that the sexual meeting was consensual, but the court found that there is sufficient evidence to condemn him. A bank that includes justices Sandeep Mehta and Prasanna B Vararal stressed that the absence of injury markings on the victim’s private parts does not automatically invalidate the case if other tests support the victim’s testimony.

“It is not necessary that in each case in which the rape is supposed to be an injury to the private parties of the victim and depends on the facts and circumstances of a particular case. We reiterate that the absence of wounds on the private parties of the victim is not always fatal in the case of criminal prosecution, “said the justice, cities.

The victim, now adult, had accused her schooling teacher of assaulting her when she was young. The Supreme Court reiterated that the testimony of a victim of rape has a weight equal to that of a wounded witness and that a conviction could be based on the exclusivity of the victim, as long as the evidence is aligned with the narrative.

In a significant decision, the peak court rejected the accused’s attempt to discredit the victim by attacking his mother’s character. The defense claimed that the victim’s mother was a “woman of light virtue” and made false accusations against the accused. However, the bank was firm in saying: “We find no reason to accept the assertion that the alleged immoral character of the prosecutor’s mother has no influence on the accused, on the basis of the testimony.

While the court acted quickly, delivering the verdict in two years, it took another 38 years to make the problem in its conclusion.

The attack took place on March 19, 1984, when the young little girl, who participated in schooling at her teacher’s house, was sexually assaulted after the teacher closed it in a room. The teacher sent two other girls on errors, isolating the victim. Despite the victim’s attempts to warn the others, only when her grandmother arrived, she was saved. However, the victim’s family faced immense pressure and threats from the local community and the accused’s family, which led to a delayed wire.