Manoharlal v. State of Madhya Pradesh
Background
A woman alleged that Manoharlal approached her at a bus stand at night, took her to several places and eventually forced her into his home and raped her. The trial court relied on her testimony to convict him, and the High Court affirmed. He challenged the conviction, with the record including inconclusive medical findings and a supposed confidant who denied receiving her account.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, acquitted Manoharlal and discharged his bail bonds. It reaffirmed that a complainant's sole reliable testimony can prove rape and that corroboration is not invariably required. In this case, however, it found her account difficult to accept and looked for supporting evidence. The inconclusive examination, the confidant's denial and the non-examination of several people relevant to the described sequence left material particulars unsupported. On the combined circumstances, the Court gave him the benefit of doubt rather than treating the allegation alone as sufficient.
Lesson Learnt
A sexual-assault complainant's trustworthy testimony can be sufficient without independent corroboration. This acquittal depended on the Court's assessment of this particular account and missing supporting evidence; it did not establish a universal requirement of injury, witnesses or medical confirmation.