Court emphasizes that absence of visible struggle does not negate rape charges when victim is overpowered by multiple accused; defence's alibi rejected as unreliable
In a significant judgment delivered on October 1, 2026, the Jharkhand High Court (Division Bench comprising Justices Ananda Sen and Pradeep Kumar Srivastava) dismissed the appeal filed by Mukesh Bilung and others challenging their conviction for gang rape of a minor prosecutrix. The accused were earlier sentenced to 20 years rigorous imprisonment and fined Rs. 50,000 each by the Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge (POCSO), Simdega.
The prosecution's case primarily rested on the sole testimony of the 16-year-old victim, who consistently narrated how the appellants forcibly took her from a village festival site to nearby fields and sugarcane plantations where they committed the heinous crime. This testimony was recorded in her fardbeyan, her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., and her deposition before the trial court, showing remarkable consistency.
Medical evidence played a pivotal role in corroborating the prosecutrix's account. Examination by three doctors revealed fresh injuries on the victim's private parts, including a ruptured hymen with fresh cut margins, congestion, and pain during examination. The medical board also confirmed the victim's age to be between 16-17 years, confirming the applicability of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. Doctors opined positively on the occurrence of sexual intercourse, which was left unchallenged by the defence.
The defence raised several grounds for appeal, including the argument that the victim's testimony was unreliable, the absence of signs of struggle disproved the occurrence of gang rape, and alleged enmity between the accused and the victim's family motivated a false implication. Further, defence witnesses claimed the victim was in their company at the time, seeking to establish an alibi.
Rejecting these contentions, the High Court observed that the absence of major external injuries or signs of struggle cannot be a sole ground to disbelieve the victim, especially when a minor girl is overpowered by multiple accused. The Court relied on precedents such as Santosh Prasad @ Santosh Kumar v. State of Bihar and Krishna Kumar Malik v. State of Haryana, emphasizing that conviction can rest on the sole testimony of the prosecutrix if it is trustworthy and corroborated by medical evidence.
The Court found the defence's alibi wholly unreliable in the face of positive medical findings and the victim's consistent narration. The mother's testimony, confirming the prompt disclosure of the incident by the victim, further strengthened the prosecution's case.
Consequently, the Court upheld the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court, dismissing the appeal for lack of merit. The judgment reiterates the judiciary's commitment to protecting the rights of vulnerable victims under POCSO and ensuring just punishment for perpetrators of sexual offences.
Bottom Line:
Sole testimony of prosecutrix in gang rape case can form basis of conviction when it is trustworthy and is corroborated by medical evidence; absence of major external injury or signs of struggle is not by itself sufficient to discard prosecution case, particularly where minor victim was overpowered by multiple accused.
Statutory provision(s): IPC Section 376(D), POCSO Act Sections 4, 8, 12, Cr.P.C. Section 164
Mukesh Bilung v. State of Jharkhand, (Jharkhand)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2992770
