High Court cites lack of competency assessment and corroborative evidence in acquitting accused under Section 377 IPC
In a significant judgment delivered on November 28, 2025, the Telangana High Court set aside the conviction of Baddam Prashanth Reddy, who was previously sentenced to ten years rigorous imprisonment for an offence under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The case, which involved allegations of sexual assault on a minor, was remanded back to the trial court after the High Court found the conviction legally unsustainable due to procedural lapses and lack of corroborative evidence.
The appellant, Baddam Prashanth Reddy, had been convicted by the Special Sessions Judge for SC & ST (POA) Act, 1989, Ranga Reddy District, on June 7, 2010. The conviction was based primarily on the testimony of the minor victim, who alleged that Reddy had subjected him to anal sex and threatened him to secure his silence. However, the High Court highlighted the failure of the trial court to conduct a mandatory competency assessment of the child witness under Section 118 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. This procedural oversight, along with the absence of medical or other corroborative evidence, formed the basis for overturning the conviction.
Justice J. Sreenivas Rao, presiding over the appeal, emphasized the importance of assessing the competency of child witnesses to ensure they understand the questions, provide rational answers, and appreciate the duty of speaking the truth. The absence of such an assessment renders the evidence unreliable, he noted. Furthermore, discrepancies in witness testimonies and unexplained delays in lodging the First Information Report (FIR) further weakened the prosecution's case.
The court's decision also referenced several precedents, including the Supreme Court's ruling in "Pradeep v. The State of Haryana (2023) 19 SCC 221," which underscores the necessity of corroborative evidence when relying on the testimony of a child witness. The judgment reiterated that while corroboration is not mandatory, prudence requires careful scrutiny of the child witness's testimony for credibility, voluntariness, and absence of tutoring.
The judgment reflects a critical examination of the procedures followed by the lower court and underscores the judiciary's commitment to ensuring justice through adherence to legal standards and procedural safeguards. The acquittal of Baddam Prashanth Reddy highlights the importance of robust evidence and procedural compliance in sustaining convictions, particularly in sensitive cases involving child witnesses.
Bottom Line:
Conviction under Section 377 IPC - Necessity of proper assessment of child witness competency under Section 118 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and corroborative evidence for sustaining conviction.
Statutory provision(s): Section 377 IPC, Section 118 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Section 506 IPC, Section 3(2)(v) of SCs/STs (POA) Act, 1989
Baddam Prashanth Reddy v. State of A.P., (Telangana) : Law Finder Doc id # 2823024
