Recent Posts

6/recent/ticker-posts

R. v. Rashidi s/o Mohamed, Crim. Rev. 25/7/68, Georges C. J.


 

R. v. Rashidi s/o Mohamed, Crim. Rev. 25/7/68, Georges C. J.

Accused was convicted of having committed an unnatural offence. [P.C. s. 154(1)].There was ample evidence that a brutal rape per anum had been committed upon complainant, an elderly woman, but he only evidence connecting accused with the offence was the testimony of the complainant herself.

            Held; (1) There is a general rule that corroborative evidence is required to support the testimony of the complainant concerning a sexual offence. (2) If a magistrate notes the absence of corroboration, warns himself of the danger of convicting in the absence of corroboration, but nevertheless finds that the evidence is so convincing that he feels it is safe to convict, it is possible to support the conviction. However, no such course was followed by the magistrate in the present case. Conviction quashed. 

Post a Comment

0 Comments