Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that sex workers cannot lodge sexual assault complaint against their clients if they refuse to pay.
The judgement ruled by bench of Justices Pinaki Chandra Ghose and Amitava Roy said that though a woman's statement while alleging rape should get importance from the trial court, it should not be taken as the ultimate truth.
The Times of India reported the bench as saying,
The evidence of prosecutrix must be examined as that of an injured witness whose presence at the spot is probable but it can never be presumed that her statement should always, without exception, be taken as gospel truth.
The ruling came in a 20-year-old case from Bengaluru wherein a maid had alleged that three people not only abducted her in an auto but also took her to a garage and gang raped her.
The accused had challenged her claim in Karnataka high court. The SC branch examined all the witnesses again and came to the conclusion that “her conduct during the alleged ordeal is also unlike a victim of rape and betrays somewhat submissive and consensual disposition," reported The Times of India.
The ruling was influenced by the account of a witness, a friend of the victim in this case, who alleged that the woman used to take money from the accused and also used to work as a prostitute at night. The witness also added that the victim had demanded Rs 1,000 from the accused which was denied to her.
The bench said, "This witness's version is plausible, and thus, fits in with the defence plea to demolish the prosecution case", reported The Times of India.
On being interrogated on why she lodged a complaint, the woman answered that she thought this would coerce the accused to pay her the money.
Writing the judgment for the bench, Justice Roy said, "Her vengeful attitude in the facts and circumstances, as disclosed by her, if true, demonstrably evinces a conduct manifested by a feeling of frustration stoked by an intense feeling of deprivation of something expected, desired or promised," reported The Times of India.
The bench drew the conclusion that since the victim had failed to prove the allegations, they were entitled to give the accused benefit of doubt.
(With inputs from The Times of India)
(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)