#victim credibility

Karnataka High Court ruled that conviction under POCSO Act Sections 4/6 and IPC 376 requires corroborative medical evidence, even if victim testimony is credible. The court acquitted the accused of sexual assault charges but upheld kidnapping conviction under IPC 363, modifying the sentence to Rs. 3,00,000 compensation. This sets a precedent for strict evidentiary standards in sexual offence cases.

Bombay High Court grants bail in a POCSO case where the victim's prior sworn statements omitted allegations against the accused, emphasizing that inconsistent statements undermine FIR credibility. The ruling reinforces that bail may be granted if victim testimony lacks reliability without corroboration.

Allahabad High Court sets aside conviction under Section 366 IPC, emphasizing that omission of the accused’s name in the FIR and uncorroborated victim testimony warrant acquittal. The ruling reinforces the principle that benefit of doubt must prevail in cases lacking credible evidence, impacting criminal trials involving sexual offences.

Chhattisgarh High Court sets a high bar for prosecuting sexual offences under false promise of marriage, requiring proof beyond reasonable doubt that consent was vitiated. The ruling underscores that a consensual relationship spanning five years, corroborative evidence, and prior travels weaken the prosecution's claim of deceit.

Meghalaya High Court holds that sole testimony of a rape survivor, if trustworthy, is sufficient for conviction; delay in FIR and minor discrepancies do not undermine reliability.