If the assessment of evidence by the High Court is perverse and unsupportable , the Supreme Court may re-appreciate the evidence Art.136 of India Constitution..- Says Supreme Court

The grammar of law permits the testimony of a prosecutrix can be accepted without any corroboration without material particulars, for she has to be placed on a higher pedestal than an injured witness, but, a pregnant one, when a Court, on studied scrutiny of the evidence finds it difficult to accept the version of the prosecutrix, because it is not unreproachable, there is requirement for search of such direct or circumstantial evidence which would lend assurance to her testimony. - Says Supreme Court

Md. Ali @ Guddu v. State of U.P.
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2238 OF 2010

Judgment Dated : 10/03/2015

CORAM : DIPAK MISRA .J , N.V. RAMANA .J

Brief Facts of the Case :

Gulistan, a 14 year old girl went out of her house to answer the call of nature but did not return for a considerable time - Search was made but found missing - FIR lodged after 11 days of the incident - Police arrested Appellant and other accused on the ground of suspicion - charged under Sections 363, 366, 368 and 376 IPC - Medical evidence not in corroboration to Prosecutrix story. -

CATCHPHRASE :
In an appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution, this Court does not normally appreciate the evidence by itself and go into the question of credibility of witness.
The Court has opined that the assessment of the evidence by the High Court is accepted as final except where the conclusions recorded by the High Court are manifestly perverse and unsupportable by the evidence on record.
Cases relied upon :
1.Arunachalam v. P.S.R. Sadhanatha and Anr.
2.State of U.P. v. Babul Nath
3.Ganga Kumar Srivastava v. State of Bihar
4. Rajesh Patel v. State of Jharkhand