LOADING...
Summarize
HC reduces rape conviction in deaf-mute survivor's case
The Madras HC noted absence of 'reference to the sign and gestures' in survivor's statement

HC reduces rape conviction in deaf-mute survivor's case

Jan 13, 2026
06:17 pm

What's the story

The Madras High Court has reduced a man's rape conviction involving a deaf and mute woman to cheating. The decision was taken after it was found that the interpreter failed to mention crucial signs and gestures in the woman's statements, according to The Indian Express. Justice M Nirmal Kumar observed that mandatory safeguards were not followed while recording her testimony, including videography where interpreters or special educators are employed under Section 119 of the Evidence Act.

Evidence concerns

Court highlights absence of sign and gesture documentation

The court noted, "In none of the statements of the victim recorded, there is any reference to the sign and gestures made." This omission was deemed critical in lending credibility to the interpretation. The court emphasized that no conviction can be based solely on evidence from an alleged survivor without proper documentation of signs and gestures. It also observed the lack of medical evidence of recent injury in the private parts. The two interpreters were also not administered oaths.

Case review

Court finds inconsistencies in prosecution's case

Moreover, the court also found inconsistencies in the prosecution's case, including contradictions about the date of the incident. It highlighted that a proposal for marriage to the survivor and appellant indicated some relationship and substance. On November 28, 2015, the woman, then 20, alleged she was sexually assaulted ten days ago at Pennagaram in the Dharmapuri district.

Sentence modification

Conviction reduced to cheating, compensation awarded

After the investigation, the accused was tried and found guilty by a trial court that sentenced him to seven years' rigorous imprisonment. The High Court modified the appellant's conviction from rape to cheating and reduced his sentence to the period already undergone. He was ordered to pay ₹2 lakh as compensation to the woman.