Even if girl leaves house on her own will to go with a boy, it does not give him right to rape her: Calcutta High Court

The Jalpaiguri bench of the Calcutta High Court recently held that even if a woman or girl leaves her house on her own to go with an accused person, this does not give a right to the accused to rape her [Hemanta Barman vs State of West Bengal]..Justice Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury made the observation while upholding the rape conviction of a man who was charged with the kidnapping and rape of a girl in 2007. .The accused man had countered that he did not kidnap the victim girl. Rather, he claimed that she had left her parents' house on her own to go with him.The Court, however, opined that even if this version of events were true, it did not mean that the man had any right to rape the victim. "If we, go by the maiden statement of the complainant (victim's father), and if it is assumed that the victim was not abducted or kidnapped she left her house with accused person on her own, that does not give the accused person the right to invade upon the privacy of the victim girl or to commit any penetrative sexual offence within the meaning of rape," the Court said. .The Court also noted the victim girl had denied the accused man's version of events. It proceeded to rely on the victim's statement and convict the accused of rape but acquitted him of the charge of kidnapping. The bench reasoned that it is well settled that if the evidence of the rape victim inspired confidence, the Court can solely rely on it to convict the accused.."In this case nothing has come out from the cross-examination of the victim to shake her credibility, therefore, there is no reason to seek corroboration as it would amount to add an insult to the injury already suffered by the victim," the Court said..The case dates back to 2007, when the father of the victim lodged a complaint alleging that one Hemanta Barman, then 26 years old, had kidnapped the victim, who was said to be studying in class 7 at the time.The accused denied the allegations and argued that he was in a relationship with the victim. He added that he was working along with the victim and her mother under the same employer and that her father was unaware of the 'love relationship' since he lived elsewhere. He asserted that the victim had left her house with him on her own and that there was no kidnapping involved. His counsel contended that the trial court ought to have considered the incident as 'an adventure of two persons in love.'.On the other hand, the victim told the trial court that she had refused to accompany the accused and that he had forcibly taken her with him. The High Court further noted that this statement by the victim was not subjected to cross-examination.The judge also relied upon the victim's statement that the accused man had kept her confined for three days and raped her.The victim had further testified that she raised a hue and cry while the accused raped her. She added that the accused man's relatives asked her why she had raised alarm the next day, leading her to disclose that she had been raped.Relying on these statements, the High Court upheld the rape conviction of the accused. However, the Court reduced the jail term awarded to Barman from 7 years to 4 years, since the incident dated back to 2007, and considering that he was the sole bread-earner for his family. .[Read Judgment]