KOCHI: As controversy rages on over the acquittal of four accused persons in the alleged sexual exploitation and subsequent suicide of two minor sisters at Attapalam near Walayar in Palakkad, an analysis of the judgment exposes that the shoddy probe and prosecution’s failure helped the accused walk scot-free.
The prosecution could not make charges of homicide or abetment of suicide stick despite the forensic surgeon providing enough evidence.
“Since the parents told the court that the girls committed suicide, the court found it unnecessary to look into the homicide angle. Despite the forensic surgeon providing evidence of sexual abuse, the prosecution could not prove the accused were the perpetrators,” said a forensic expert.
In the case of the death of the 13-year-old girl, the forensic surgeon had informed the court that the injuries in her anal canal could be due to anal penetration. However, during cross-examination by the defence lawyer, the surgeon said they could also have been caused by infection.
The prosecutor could have established it was not so. Accepting the defence lawyer’s argument, the court held that expert evidence could be used only for corroboration.
The sessions court, while delivering the judgment in the case related to the younger girl’s death, said there was absence of evidence to connect the accused with the alleged offence.
"The doctor who conducted the postmortem examination opined there was evidence suggestive of unnatural sexual offence in the form of multiple episodes of anal penetrations. However, it was not conclusive proof to say she was subjected to anal penetration. There is absence of substantive evidence to be corroborated by opinion evidence," the court held. The expert said hanging could be suicidal, homicidal or accidental and it should be determined through investigation.
“The prosecution failed to prove the homicide or abetment angle. The parents’ admission that the girls committed suicide weakened the case. In the case of the elder girl’s death, the arrested persons were released without their statements being recorded. The statement expressing doubts over the death was recorded after the younger girl died, 53 days later,” said the expert.
The investigation agency and the prosecution conducted appreciation of evidence mechanically which led to the acquittals, said former Director-General of Prosecution T Asaf Ali, who had appeared in the Suryanelly case.
“The court cannot insist on an eyewitness in a rape case. Three girls who had gone for election campaigning had told the court that the girl was frightened and tried to hide when she saw one of the accused. She told them the man had abused her. The witnesses were adjudged hostile. The victim’s last statement and evidence from the forensic surgeon were enough to establish the crime. However, the court lost sight of the truth advanced by the prosecution,” he said.
BOTCHED FROM THE START
Palakkad: In the case of the death of the 13-year-old girl, the forensic surgeon had informed the court that the injuries in her anal canal could be due to anal penetration. However, during cross-examination by the defence lawyer, the surgeon said they could also have been caused by infection