Rape - Mentally challenged minor victim - Victim's mental incapacity negates consent for sexual intercourse

Bombay High Court Upholds Conviction in Rape Case of Mentally Challenged Minor. The court confirms a 15-year rigorous imprisonment for Chintaman in a landmark judgment emphasizing the protection of vulnerable victims.

In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court's Nagpur Bench has upheld the conviction of Chintaman Lohale for the rape of a mentally challenged minor, confirming a 15-year rigorous imprisonment sentence. The judgment, delivered by Justice Nivedita P. Mehta, underscores the judicial commitment to safeguarding vulnerable individuals, affirming the foundational legal principle that mentally challenged individuals cannot provide valid consent for sexual acts.

The case revolved around a heinous crime committed against a 14-year-old mentally challenged girl, who was sexually assaulted by Chintaman, a neighbor and acquaintance of the victim's family. The victim was discovered to be pregnant during a routine medical camp, prompting her mother to lodge a complaint with the police after the accused reportedly confessed during a village meeting attended by community leaders.

Despite the absence of DNA evidence, the court found overwhelming corroborative evidence, including medical reports confirming the pregnancy and testimonies from multiple witnesses, including the victim's parents, medical practitioners, and community workers. The court noted the victim's consistent identification of the accused, which was facilitated by an interpreter and psychologist due to her mental condition.

Justice Mehta emphasized that the victim's mental incapacity negated any notion of consent, thereby substantiating the charge of rape under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. The court dismissed the appellant's arguments regarding procedural irregularities and the absence of DNA testing, deeming them insufficient to overturn the conviction given the robust evidentiary support.

The judgment also addressed societal challenges in rural settings, recognizing the delay in lodging the FIR due to stigma and the pursuit of community resolution before police intervention. The court reaffirmed that such delays are not uncommon in cases involving minors and mentally challenged victims, where societal and familial pressures play a significant role.

This ruling marks a pivotal moment in the judicial approach to cases involving vulnerable victims, reinforcing the importance of comprehensive evidence over singular reliance on scientific proof. The court's decision serves as a reminder of the legal system's duty to protect those who cannot protect themselves and ensure justice is served.

Bottom Line:

Rape - Mentally challenged minor victim - Victim's mental incapacity negates consent for sexual intercourse - Accused convicted under Section 376 IPC based on consistent identification by victim, corroborative medical evidence, and substantiated extra-judicial confession.

Statutory provision(s): Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 376, Evidence Act, 1872 Sections 118, 119, Code of Criminal Procedure Sections 313, 161, 164, 311

Chintaman v. State of Maharashtra, (Bombay)(Nagpur Bench) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2792391