Recent Posts

6/recent/ticker-posts

Amri s/o Ahmed v. R., Crim. App. 277-D-68, 6/6/68, Hamlyn J.



Amri s/o Ahmed v. R., Crim. App. 277-D-68, 6/6/68, Hamlyn J.

Accused was convicted of rape [P.C. ss. 130, 131]. The version of the matter offered by the accused was that accused and complainant, a virgin of 15 or 16 years of age, had agreed to undress and to engage in some sexual intimacies with each other, the girl saying from the start that there would be no intercourse. After some time together, accused did in fact have intercourse with the girl, apparently having to overcome some resistance on her part with force.

            Held: (1) “If the girls …. Laid down any condition … however foolish she was in allowing any sexual intimacy at all, the breach of such condition and penetration would constitute rape. That a woman may allow some form of sexual liberty to a man (be it little or great) does not entitle that man to proceed to have intercourse with her against her will.” The conviction must therefore stand. (2)In the matter of sentence, accused should have the benefit of his “not wholly unsupported version of the mater.” The Court must consider the fact that accused may have been “entrapped by desires which may have been inflamed by the recklessness and foolishness of the complainant ….” Sentence reduced to 6 months’ imprisonment, an order for corporal punishment being set aside.

  

Post a Comment

0 Comments