In a significant judgment, the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Indore Bench, held that a delay of six to nine days in filing a First Information Report (FIR) in an attempt to rape case is “unnatural.” The ruling came as the Court set aside the conviction of an accused in the case titled Golu v. The State of Madhya Pradesh, citing the delay in reporting as a critical factor undermining the prosecution’s case.
Justice Prem Narayan Singh, who authored the judgment, stated that while a short delay of one or two days in lodging an FIR may be excusable in sensitive cases like sexual assault, an unexplained delay of six to nine days weakens the credibility of the accusations. This ruling underscores the significance of timely reporting in criminal cases, especially those involving allegations of serious offences like sexual violence.
Background of the Case
The case involved the accused, Golu, who was charged with attempting to rape the prosecutrix. The prosecution’s case hinged on the testimony of the victim, who alleged that the accused made an attempt to rape her, resulting in scratches and injuries. However, the FIR was lodged six to nine days after the alleged incident, with no substantial explanation for the delay in reporting the crime.
At trial, the prosecution argued that the delay was due to the sensitivity of the case and the trauma experienced by the victim. However, the defense contended that such an extensive delay raised doubts about the veracity of the accusations, suggesting that the injuries could have been self-inflicted or caused in unrelated circumstances.
High Court’s Observations
The Madhya Pradesh High Court, in its judgment delivered on September 27, 2024, sided with the defense and ruled that the delay in lodging the FIR was indeed “unnatural” and unexplained. Justice Prem Narayan Singh remarked that in cases of attempted rape, where there is usually an urgency in reporting the crime, an unexplained delay of nearly a week raises serious concerns about the credibility of the prosecution’s version of events.
In his observations, Justice Singh noted:
“So far as the injuries on the person of the prosecutrix are concerned, since the FIR was lodged after a delay of six to nine days from the incident, such injuries of scratches have no meaning.”
The Court expressed doubt over the authenticity of the injuries, noting that the scratches reported by the victim could not be solely relied upon as evidence in the absence of a timely filed FIR. The injuries, while present, were insufficient to corroborate the claims of attempted rape due to the delayed report.
Legal Principle: The Importance of Timely FIRs
The Court’s decision highlights a well-established principle in criminal law: the prompt filing of an FIR is essential to ensure the integrity of the investigation and the credibility of the allegations. Delays in filing an FIR, especially in cases involving serious accusations like sexual violence, often result in the loss of crucial evidence and can be perceived as an indication of fabrication or afterthought.
The Supreme Court of India has previously emphasized that delays in lodging FIRs should be adequately explained, and courts must take into account the nature of the case and the trauma suffered by the victim. However, unexplained delays—particularly in cases where there are no exceptional circumstances—can weaken the prosecution’s case.
In this case, the High Court noted that the prosecutrix did not provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay in reporting the crime, which created a reasonable doubt about the sequence of events. The Court acknowledged that victims of sexual assault often face emotional and psychological challenges in coming forward, but held that the delay in this case was too significant and unjustified.
Judicial Precedent: Delay as a Factor in Acquittals
The judgment by the Madhya Pradesh High Court is consistent with established legal principles concerning the impact of delayed FIRs in sexual assault cases. In numerous cases, Indian courts have held that unexplained delays in lodging an FIR can be detrimental to the prosecution’s case, as they cast doubts on the victim’s credibility and the factual basis of the allegations.
For instance, in the landmark case of Tulsidas Kanolkar v. State of Goa (2003), the Supreme Court held that while delays in reporting sexual assault cases should not automatically discredit the victim’s testimony, such delays must be adequately explained. In cases where no satisfactory explanation is offered, the delay can be a valid ground for acquittal.
Similarly, in Ramdas v. State of Maharashtra (2007), the apex court observed that the delay in lodging an FIR, if unexplained, provides room for doubt and affects the prosecution’s case. This principle has been reiterated in several other cases involving sexual offences.
In the present case, the Madhya Pradesh High Court relied on similar reasoning, finding that the prosecutrix’s delay of nearly a week in reporting the alleged attempt to rape was unreasonable and unexplained, thereby raising doubts about the authenticity of the charges against the accused.
Acquittal of the Accused
As a result of these findings, the High Court set aside the conviction of the accused. The Court held that the prosecution had failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt, primarily due to the delay in filing the FIR and the lack of reliable corroborative evidence.
Justice Singh further noted that the trial court had erred in convicting the accused based solely on the testimony of the prosecutrix and the superficial injuries observed on her body. Without timely reporting and corroborative evidence, the conviction could not be sustained.
Impact of the Judgment
The ruling by the Madhya Pradesh High Court underscores the judiciary’s commitment to ensuring that criminal convictions are based on solid evidence and that due process is followed at every stage. The judgment reaffirms the importance of timely reporting of crimes, especially in sensitive cases involving allegations of sexual violence, and emphasizes that the delay must be adequately explained for the prosecution’s case to hold water.
While this decision may lead to debates about the challenges faced by victims of sexual assault in coming forward promptly, it also highlights the need for a balanced approach in ensuring justice for both the victim and the accused. Courts must carefully scrutinize delays in reporting to ensure that they are not being used as a tool for false accusations.
As for the accused, Golu, his acquittal signals relief from what could have been a wrongful conviction, based on questionable evidence and procedural delays. The ruling may also serve as a reminder for law enforcement agencies and prosecutors to handle such cases with greater diligence and urgency to prevent similar situations in the future.
Conclusion
The Madhya Pradesh High Court’s ruling that a delay of six to nine days in filing an FIR in an attempt to rape case is “unnatural” marks an important judicial precedent on the role of timely reporting in criminal cases. By acquitting the accused due to the lack of credible evidence, the Court has reinforced the principle that justice must be based on timely and well-substantiated claims, ensuring the integrity of the legal process.