State of Karnataka v. Shivanna @ Tarkari Shivanna (2014)

Introduction 

The Supreme Court in State of Karnataka v. Shivanna @ Tarkari Shivanna (2014) delivered a landmark ruling addressing procedural lapses and delays in rape investigations. 

• The judgment was delivered by a two-judge Bench comprising Justice Gyan Sudha Misra and Justice V. Gopala Gowda. 
• The case highlighted the urgent need for fast-track procedures in rape and child sexual abuse cases, ensuring justice is not delayed or denied.

Facts

• The respondent, Shivanna @ Tarkari Shivanna, a resident of Mandya District, Karnataka, was searching for work in Albur village. 
• The victim was a six-year-old girl, living with her family in the same village. 
• On 17th March 2003, while the child was playing with her sister, the accused lured her away with the promise of giving biscuits. 
• He then sexually assaulted and raped the victim and left her near her grandfather’s house. 
• The victim was taken to a government hospital at Nonavinakere, and subsequently referred to Tiptur Government Hospital for further medical care. 
• The police registered a case, and the accused was arrested on 18 March 2003. 
• The Trial Court convicted the accused under Section 376(2)(f) IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment. 
• On appeal, the High Court of Karnataka upheld the conviction but reduced the sentence to 10 years rigorous imprisonment and imposed a fine of ₹50,000. 
• Aggrieved by the sentence reduction, the State of Karnataka filed a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court of India. 

Issues Involved 

• Whether the procedure followed in recording the victim’s statement under Section 164 of CrPC was proper and in accordance with law? 
• Whether there is a need for special procedural safeguards to ensure the victim’s dignity and speedy trial in rape cases? 

Court’s Observations 

The Supreme Court observed that: 

• Rape is a heinous offence that destroys the victim’s dignity and psychological well-being. 
• There exists a pressing need for fast-track procedures in rape and gang rape cases, not merely fast-track courts. 
• The repeated recording of the victim’s statement causes trauma and delay and must be minimized. 
• The Court noted serious lapses in the investigation and recording of the victim’s statement under Section 164 CrPC. 
• Invoking Article 142 of the Constitution of India, the Court issued interim directions (mandamus) to ensure uniform procedures across the country. 

Court’s Directions: 

The Court issued the following binding directions to all police stations and investigating officers in India: 

• Immediate Production Before Magistrate: 
  Upon receiving information about the commission of rape, the investigating officer shall immediately take the victim to a Metropolitan or preferably Lady Judicial Magistrate for recording her statement under Section 164 CrPC. 
• Confidentiality: 
  A copy of the statement shall be given to the investigating officer, with a specific direction not to disclose its contents until the charge sheet is filed. 
• Time Recording: 
  The officer must record the exact date and time when he learned of the offence and when the victim was taken before the Magistrate. 
• Delay Explanation: 
  Any delay beyond 24 hours in taking the victim before the Magistrate must be explained in writing and recorded in the case diary, with a copy given to the Magistrate. 
• Medical Examination: 
  The victim must be immediately sent for medical examination as per Section 164A CrPC. 
  The medical report must be handed over to the Magistrate promptly. 
• Circulation of Directions: 
  A copy of this order was directed to be circulated to all Director Generals of Police (DGPs) and Commissioners of Police in States and Union Territories for strict compliance.

Conclusion 

The Court directed a fast-track procedural mechanism for rape and child sexual abuse cases, ensuring immediate recording of the victim’s statement, timely medical examination, and confidentiality of investigation. 

The ruling serves as a foundational precedent in protecting the rights and dignity of victims while ensuring effective enforcement of POCSO and IPC provisions against sexual offenders.