Absence of injury does not mean abuse did not happen, says Madras HC

Counsel for the accused submitted that in the event of any physical violence, there must be bodily injuries on the victim.
Madras High Court (Photo | D Sampath Kumar, EPS)
Madras High Court (Photo | D Sampath Kumar, EPS)

CHENNAI: The Madras High Court has confirmed the conviction and sentence of 10 years rigorous imprisonment (RI), under sections 6 read with 18 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act), awarded by a trial court to an accused in a rape case. Turning down the contention of the accused, Justice S Vaidyanathan said mere absence of bodily injury on the minor victim girl cannot be a ground to say there was no offence at all.

Counsel for the accused submitted that in the event of any physical violence, there must be bodily injuries on the victim. In this case, there was no such injury, he said. “It is a highly fallacious argument advanced by the counsel for the accused inasmuch as a minor girl did not even know as to what for she is being pulled in and touched. Therefore, an inference can be drawn that there cannot be much resistance on the side of a minor girl and in the absence of any opposition, naturally, there is no possibility of sustaining injury on the body.

Mere absence of bodily injury cannot be a ground to say that there is no offence at all, especially when it was reported through evidences produced in the court that semen was detected on the girl’s chudidhar. “Thus, the version of the victim girl has been duly supported by the report of the Forensic Sciences Department, as the victim minor girl in her 164 statement before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Erode, had clearly stated that when the accused had touched her, some liquid like water fell on her chudidhar and on seeing the same, she had run out of the house. This cannot be said to be a tutored one,” the judge said and dismissed the appeal from the accused.

Related Stories

No stories found.
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com