By Himabindu Lingala

The Punjab & Haryana High Court acquitted a man previously convicted for committing aggravated sexual penetrative assault under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO). 

In the case at hand, the victim reported that she frequently encountered the accused on her way to college. On January 10, 2017, the accused allegedly promised to marry her and persuaded her to accompany him under the pretense of solemnizing their marriage. The accused subsequently took the victim to his residence, confined them in a locked room, and coerced her into establishing a physical relationship with him. Based on the victims’ statement a case was filed agasint the accused under Section 363, 366, 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 (Punishment for penetrative sexual assault), Section 6 (Punishment for aggravated penetrative sexual assault) and Section 8 (Punishent for sexual assault) of POCSO.

The trial court after examining the material evidence presented on record found the accused guilty under the charges filed against him. Consequently an appeal was filed against the judgement delivered by the Trial court. 

The Division bench overturned the Trial Courts judgement. The Division bench upon examining the prosecutions’ cross examination stated that the evidence strongly indicated that the victim voluntarily accompanied the accused to the alleged crime scene. The Court further observed that the accused had allegedly driven the motorcycle through densely populated areas while the victim was seated on the pillion, reportedly under duress. In such a scenario, the Court reasoned, it would have been reasonable to expect the victim to alert nearby individuals by calling for help or otherwise drawing attention to her predicament. The victim’s failure to take such actions cast additional doubt on the prosecution’s account, highlighting inconsistencies in the narrative presented. This conclusion was bolstered by the victim’s testimony, wherein she stated that she had not sustained any internal or external injuries on any part of her body during the alleged act of physical relations with the accused. 

In addressing the medical evidence, they observed that no incriminating inference could be drawn against the accused. Further, the medical report noted that the likelihood of detecting live spermatozoa (active and functioning sperm containing DNA and capable of fertilising the egg) diminishes significantly within a time frame of 12 to 36 hours post intercourse, further complicating the establishment of conclusive evidence against the accused.

The Division Bench opined that “benefit of doubt” should be afforded to the accused. The Division Bench acquitted the accused of the charges.

Case Name: X v. State of Punjab

Citation: 2024 SCC OnLine P&H 14051

Click here to read the Judgement/Order