Suppiah Karupasamy v. The Hon. Attorney General – 187/2013-2017

In the case between The Hon. Attorney General and Suppiah Karupasamy, the court addressed whether the conviction and sentence for rape of a girl under sixteen under Section 364(2)(e) of the Penal Code (as amended by Act No. 22 of 1995) were justified. The court affirmed that, where medical evidence and the credible testimony of the prosecutrix are present, such evidence suffices to sustain a conviction for rape. This determination reaffirmed the principle that the testimony of a prosecutrix, if found credible and corroborated by medical evidence, may be sufficient to convict even in the presence of alleged contradictions. Reliance was placed on both local and Indian case law regarding testimonial standards in sexual offences, underscoring that due deference should be afforded to the trial