The Sikkim High Court has upheld the conviction of a 24-year-old man found guilty of raping his 80-year-old maternal grandmother. The division bench, comprising Justice Meenakshi Madan Rai and Justice Bhaskar Raj Pradhan, confirmed the judgment of the Fast Track Sessions Court, emphasizing the robust evidence and thorough trial process that led to the conviction.
The appellant was convicted under Sections 376(2)(f) (rape of a relative, guardian, etc.), 376(2)(n) (repeatedly committing rape on the same woman), and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code. The heinous crime occurred while the victim was living with her daughter, son-in-law, and their son, the convict.
The case came to light when the victim’s daughter returned from a trip to West Bengal and found her mother missing. The elderly woman was eventually found at a neighbor’s house, where she revealed the assault. She reported that her grandson had raped her multiple times and threatened her with further harm if she disclosed the abuse.
In her First Information Report (FIR), the victim detailed how the appellant would chase and touch her inappropriately, often while intoxicated. She also mentioned his previous incarceration and the threats he made to silence her. During the trial, the victim consistently reiterated her allegations, and the medical examination report supported her claims of sexual assault.
The defense argued that the victim’s age was misrepresented, the delay in lodging the FIR was unexplained, and the victim’s immediate neighbor, who could have been a key witness, was not called to testify. It was also pointed out that the victim’s clothing was not seized, and there were no physical injuries on her. The appellant further suggested a psychiatric evaluation of the appellant, citing his history of alcohol abuse and violence.
The court addressed the delay in lodging the FIR, acknowledging that the victim’s reluctance to report the crime was understandable given the familial relationship. The Supreme Court has previously emphasized that delays in reporting rape cases do not necessarily undermine the prosecution’s case, particularly in sensitive situations involving close family members. The court noted that “she was too ashamed and did not tell anyone about the incident which is absolutely understandable under the said circumstances.”
The trial court had also observed that the victim’s daughter, the mother of the accused, had reported the matter against her own son. “It is thus evident that it is under sheer compulsion being subjected to rape repeatedly by her accused grandson that the mother has mustered the courage to finally approach the police,” the high court stated.
The trial court had sentenced the appellant to rigorous imprisonment for life and fined Rs 10,000 for each rape conviction, along with a two-year term and a Rs 1,000 fine for criminal intimidation. The sentences were to run concurrently.
Observing the thoroughness of the trial court’s proceedings, the High Court upheld the appellant’s conviction, affirming the gravity of the crime and the credibility of the victim’s testimony. The appeal was dismissed, ensuring that justice was served for the victim.
