Match the List-I with List-II

List I (Legal Cases)	List II (Judgment Ruling)
A. Rameshwar Vs. State of Rajasthan, 1952	I. Supreme Court held that the testimony of the rape victim should not be rejected unless there are very strong evidences mitigating its veracity.
B. Rafiq Vs. State of UP, 1980	II. Supreme Court held that corroborative evidence of the woman's testimony is not necessary.
C. Harpal Singh and another Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh	III. Supreme Court held that in case of rape, the necessity of corroboration was to be treated only as a ‘rule of prudence’.
D. Bharwada Bhogibhai Hirjibhai Vs. State of Gujarat, 1983	IV. Supreme Court held that a woman's past sexual experience is immaterial in a rape trial.

Correct option is B

Understanding the Cases:

These cases all deal with significant legal precedents regarding rape trials in India. They address crucial issues like the credibility of a rape victim's testimony and the need for corroborating evidence.

Analyzing each case and ruling:

• A. Rameshwar Vs. State of Rajasthan 1952:

  • This was an early and important case that established a foundational principle in Indian rape law.
  • Ruling: The Supreme Court held that the testimony of a rape victim should not be rejected unless there are very strong reasons to doubt its veracity. This emphasizes the importance of giving weight to the victim's statement.
  • Therefore, A matches with I.

• B. Rafiq Vs. State of UP, 1980:

  • This case further strengthened the position of the victim's testimony.
  • Ruling: The Supreme Court held that corroborative evidence is not always necessary for a conviction in a rape case. This means that a conviction can be based solely on the victim's testimony if it is found to be credible.
  • Therefore, B matches with II.

• C. Harpal Singh and another Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh, 1981:

  • This case clarified the role of corroboration.
  • Ruling: The Supreme Court held that in rape cases, the necessity of corroboration should be treated only as a "rule of prudence." This means that while corroboration can be helpful, it is not mandatory.
  • Therefore, C matches with III.

• D. Bharwada Bhogibhai Hirjibhai Vs. State of Gujarat, 1983:

  • This case addressed the issue of the victim's past sexual history.
  • Ruling: The Supreme Court held that a woman's past sexual intercourse is immaterial in a rape trial. This means that the victim's sexual history cannot be used to discredit her testimony or suggest that she is less likely to be a victim of rape.
  • Therefore, D matches with IV.

Matching the Lists:

• A - I
• B - II
• C - III
• D - IV

Therefore, the correct answer is 2. A-I, B-II, C-III, D-IV.