Victim's testimony 'enough' for rape conviction: POCSO court jails 2 men for 20 yrs even after DNAs do not match

A special court under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act has handed down a 20-year rigorous imprisonment sentence to two individuals found guilty of raping a 16-year-old girl with a mental age of 11 years.

The DNA test results did not link either of the accused to the biological father of the victim’s fetus.

Despite this, the court emphasized that DNA evidence alone cannot be considered conclusive in rape cases and should be used as corroborative evidence.

The victim’s harrowing ordeal came to light when her pregnancy was discovered by her paternal aunt.

Initially, the minor survivor claimed it was due to overeating, but after a positive pregnancy test, she bravely revealed the truth.

She disclosed that she had been repeatedly sexually assaulted by a shop worker she had befriended while running errands and by a 39-year-old man who was the husband of her mother’s friend.

The court, presided over by Special Judge Seema C Jadhav, acknowledged that the DNA test results did not directly implicate the accused as the biological father.

However, they emphasized that the victim’s testimony was consistent and reliable, providing sufficient evidence to prove the charge of penetrative sexual assault against the accused.

During the trial, the court heard from a total of 11 witnesses, including the minor survivor, her paternal aunt, father, police officers, and doctors. Medical professionals conducted a mental health assessment, revealing that the victim’s IQ indicated borderline intellectual functioning with a mental age of 11 years and 5 months.

The judge condemned the heinous acts committed by the accused, acknowledging the severe psychological and emotional impact it had on the victim, leaving a lasting scar on her life.

As part of the verdict, each accused was fined Rs 25,000, with the amount to be paid to the minor survivor as compensation.

In light of the sensitive nature of the case related to sexual assault, the victim’s identity has been withheld to protect her privacy, in accordance with the directives of the Supreme Court.