CHENNAI: Describing a judgment of a trial court which had acquitted a man accused of aggravated penetrative sexual assault on a thirteen year old girl despite the DNA tests proving parentage, as ‘travesty of justice’, the Madras High Court has overturned the verdict to punish the man with ten years of imprisonment.
Justice R Hemalatha made the comments while setting aside the verdict of the trial court in Nagapattinam passed in 2017. The trial court acquitted the respondent, who was accused of sexually assaulting the victim in 2013 continuously for over a while.
As he had threatened her, she did not reveal the offence. The girl gave birth to a baby in 2015 at a government hospital while waiting for treatment for stomach pain at the outpatient unit.
Strangely, the trial court acquitted him in 2017 on the sole ground that the victim could not have delivered the baby in 2015 because she had sex with him only in 2013, as per her deposition in the court. Challenging the acquittal, the prosecution preferred the appeal in the High Court. Government Advocate S Rajakumar appeared for the prosecution.
Justice Hemalatha described as “highly shocking” the observation of the trial court judge that if victim had been sexually assaulted in the year 2013, she would have given birth to a child within 10 or 11 months but she delivered the baby only in 2015.
It is not known as to how the trial court had come to a decision that the victim never had sexual intercourse with the respondent ten months prior to delivery of a female child, the judge said, adding that this plea was not even taken by the accused himself.
“The observations and conclusions of the trial court are appalling, to say the least. It is not a case of low standard of delivery of justice but rather it is travesty of justice where basic tenets of law have been buried deep to enable the culprit go scot free,” she slammed.
The judge said despite existence of comprehensive laws like the POCSO Act, the “scale of abuse is staggering” and in majority of the cases, the perpetrators are known to the victim leading to reluctance on the victim's part to seek redressal.
Stating that the accused does not deserve any sympathy because even after knowing the age of the victim, he continued to repeatedly abuse her, Justice Hemalatha held that “whether the sexual act was consensual or forced is immaterial” as far as the present case is concerned because of the age of the victim.
Setting aside the order of the trial court, Justice Hemalatha convicted and sentenced the accused to 10 years under section 6 and 7 years under section 7 of the POCSO Act, along with Rs 2000 fine on each count for committing aggravated penetrative assault on the minor girl.