Sexual assault without removal of underwear will still constitute rape: Meghalaya HC

Although the defendant admitted that he had “lost control” of himself and committed the offence, the division bench was content that the sentence imposed on the appellant in this case does not appear moved, confirming the conviction of the trial court on March 14.

The defendant claimed that since he is of average intellect with no formal education, his confession must be considered wrongful, but the mere fact that his translated statement reveals that he confessed to committing rape would not mean that there was penetrative sex.

The young girl, who was 10 at the time, initially claimed that the man grabbed her and took her to a bed where he made her lie down before “he took his pants and he pulled my underwear and then he raped me”.

However, she later changed her statement and admitted that her mother taught her how to say something and that “he didn’t open my underwear” during the assault.

The court in its judgment said that the medical examiner substantiated and maintained that the nature of the tearing of the hymen in this case indicated that it had been pushed by a foreign body and not due to the involvement of the victim to a strenuous sporting activity. activity.

“Even if the victim’s testimony during his cross-examination is taken at face value, it would not imply that there was no penetrative sex. If it is accepted that at At the relevant time the victim was wearing his underpants and the appellant rubbed his organ over his underpants, there was no difficulty of penetration,” the order added.

Comments are closed.